Hello Beautiful!

It looks like you're new to The Community. If you'd like to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

ALL OF US TRYING SO HARD TO BE VEGAN AND TAKE CARE,BUT HOW ABOUT COMPUTER RADIATION??? WHAT DO YOU D

Have any of you been concern about computer/cell phones radiation??? it just hit me all of the sudden. My husband told me that we are surrounded by radiation all over from cell towers,computers,tv, anything that produces energy. It is soo frustrating because we try to take care of our health and body and this is affecting us soo much without noticing sometimes. I spend 70 percent of time on the computer because of work. Any input/advice/comment??? Thanks!

God Bless!!!

2»

Comments

  • I worry about this, too. I try not to carry my mobile phone on my body all the time.

    I work at the computer though, too, and I have no idea what to do about it.

  • I also think you shouldn't worry to much about this. Eating of processed SAD food is much more damaging to your body then a tiny bit of EM radiation.

  • I'm not sure how true this is, but apparantly those Himalayn salt lamp releases..(I think its) Negative Ions, which remove or counteract those produced by TV's and Computers. They definitly do something, but for the techincal jargon I suggest google.

    So maybe having one on your desk would be a good idea. Also plants there are certain plants that absorb the radiation. But again; google.

  • for the computer you can buy these little balls filled with a rare earth element - there are two balls each one goes on a special spot on the computer. it is called EMF bioshield, something like that. computers are not the biggest issue, cell phones are. cell phones are the real problem, and so are wireless networks which radiate all around you. the best thing to do is to rarely use the cell phone, just for emergencies (don't carry it in your pocket unless you're gonna need it) and for the wireless network thing well I'm stumped. I know there are things you can wear to counteract the radiation but I'm not sure how effective they actually are. There is a lot of research behind cell phones and radiation, it's all over the web.

  • this is always a concern as well. it's hard to find products that REALLY work, not just some bulljive phony. :)

  • It certainly is a potential problem. I have a brother-in-law who gets terrible headaches, nausea and other problems from EM radiation. Just a wonderful by-product of our civilized lives .As far as I know the doctors haven't even made up a name for this one yet as it is very rare (just wait, as more and more people "get" this disease they come up with something). Aside from living in a cave in the middle of nowhere, we all have to live with this. As others have mentioned, a RAW diet makes your body stronger/healthier and it probably wouldn't hurt to look into some of the remedies touched on above.

  • I think this is definitely something to be concerned about. Laptops are by far the biggest danger. They have very little casing to prevent radiation from escaping, where as desktops offer more protection. Having a laptop on your body is like carrying around a small microwave, really. I find that if mine is near me I have less restful sleep. I also noticed a very big negative difference in my overall health after moving to San Francisco from the suburbs, even though my diet has improved since then. There was no correlation.

    My solution to this is orgone. Like the salt lamps people mention, these take in positively charged energy and output it as negatively charged. They're phenomenal devices. The result is actually more beneficial than if you were to have no radiation in the first place. They have visible effects, too. You can experiment with them for yourself. Crops grow several times larger with orgone nearby than without. If you place an orgone pyramid above a cup of water in a freezer, the water will swirl, peak upwards, and freeze conically, defying gravity. With enough orgone, the sky above the area will actually clear up on a day of overcast or smog (I have seen the entire sky over San Francisco covered in thick gray clouds on a windy day, and no matter how long I watched the clouds blow toward the sky above my apartment, there remained a visible, large clear patch. I watched this for an hour.) Animals tend to gravitate toward them as well. Though I don't expect them, in an environment like this, to really do enough damage control. My personal solution is to move out of the city and to a neighborhood in Hawaii that receives no cellphone service, very little WiFi pollution, and fewer electronics in general (one week from now :D). Get out of big cities if you can, for sure. As if the lower oxygen levels, constant noise and high density of people in those areas weren't reason enough to move, health-wise.

    Don't underestimate the harm this stuff can do. The amount of time cell towers and wireless devices have been around is so miniscule. You have no idea what sort of affect this could have.

    Don't mistake what you know for all there is to know.

  • sv3sv3

    I sometimes worry about this. I hate talking for longer than a minute on my mobile phone. My ear/head burns and I know this cannot be healthy.

    I work in an office so spend most of my time neasr computers/wireless/etc.

    I've looked into those pendants/devises to counter the radiation but they're pretty expensive and I'm not sure I can bring myself to spend the money on something I have no idea about.

  • You can make orgone devices yourself if they are too expensive. Look for some tutorials.

  • edited July 19

    If you read Conscious Eating by Gabriel Cousens MD you would know that miso and kombucha helps to deflect EMF and Cell Phone Radiation! I highly recommend ALL of Gabriel Cousens MD books but Conscious Eating and The Rainbow Green Live Food Cuisine in particular and I based all of my RAW IN TEN MINUTES books, DVDs, recipes on his research, advice and recommendations! So that is why I have miso in my recipes.

    Chef Bryan Au

     

  • ambiguousambiguous Raw Newbie

    Seaweeds are good at clearing junk from your system--including nuclear radiation. Plus they're great for you in other ways.

    I actually have a device that measures electromagnetic radiation, and it's not the computer or cell phone that gives off the most radiation--my blender, dehydrator, juicer, and food processor give off much, much more radiation. I now always try to keep my body away from these devices when preparing food.

    I don't really believe those pendants do anything. It's just too silly.

  • That is interesting about orgone.

  • Thanks all for your reply.

    Ambiguous, where did you bought this device to measure radiation??i been looking online and can't find any. Thanks!

  • M42M42

    Hello Raquel and everyone else here,

    Here's my idea about computer radiation being harmful.

    - Wireless networks are much weaker than for example the radiation emitted by people's cellphones, which is apparent from the fact that cellphones can connect over hundreds of meters and wireless networks typically have a reach of 20-50 meters.

    - The main type of radiation computers emit is around the wavelength of 400 nm (also known as visible light), most of the rest is lower frequency. These fotons (light-particles) don't have enough energy to break chemical bonds or anything so they're not more likely to harm you than a normal lamp is.

    - I've seen no one demonstrate any significant harmful effects from being near functional computers, even though most of the western world is near them on a dayly basis.

    So I believe it's safe.

    A few additional observations....

    - The sun emits much more radiation and of much higher energy per light-particle, which is more harmful (apparent from the effect on your skin if you're in the sun for too long).

    - From my experience, sciency stuff about wavelengths of light has an adverse effect, not exactly creating trust, but ok...

    - I don't say computers aren't harmful for children; they can easily get addicted :-P The radiation however is probably harmless

    - It may sound unfriendly but it's really just trying to help you... Using a lot of question marks and writing everything in caps doesn't really accomplish anything positive at all, but makes the whole thing seems a bit... immature :-/ Sorry to say so, it's just my impression, better for me to say it here than in a situation when anything actually depends on it :-)

    Kind regards,

    Mark

  • ambiguousambiguous Raw Newbie

    This is the meter we have: http://www.amazon.com/Tech-International-Cellsensor-Detection-Meter/dp/B0013P6ZJQ

    Note that the frequency of radiation says more about how harmful the radiation is than does the distance the radiation can/does travel. For instance, the radio waves that carry audible radio signals (that we listen to on the radio) travel many miles, but the frequency of these radio waves is less harmful than, say, the frequency put out by Tasers, which doesn't go very far, but is obviously quite harmful.

    Thus I'm not sure the reasoning above suggesting why cell phones are more harmful than wireless networks really holds water.

  • M42M42

    Hello,

    Excuse me for taking so long to reply (haven't had time to read this forum for a while); I'll gladly clarify my post considering there appears to be some doubt bout it.

    Certainly frequency says a lot about how harmful radiation is; X-rays (~10^18 Hz) and gamma rays (~10^22 Hz) are a lot more harmful than radiowaves (~10^7 Hz) or visible light (~10^15 Hz), which is why doctors stand behind a wall when doing X-ray measurements, why radioactive wast (gamma) is stored in meters of concrete and why you can walk in sunlight (to some extend) without dying.

    (Probably not everyone is familiar with the ~10^22 Hz notation; it is short for roughly(~) a 1 with 22 0's after is:

    10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 Hz. With the same logic ~10^7 Hz means 10 000 000 Hz. The Hz is short for hertz, the number of vibrations per second, which is called the frequency; a higher frequency means higher energy. I hope that clears things up).

    To continue, mobile phones operate at around 1 or 2 GHz, so ~2* 10^6 Hz, whereas the radiation from a wireless PC network is slightly higher at 2 to 5 Ghz (~5* 10^6 Hz). Even though this is more than double the frequency, it is really both very low. Sunlight is the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the double of the frequency of computer networks (25x double).

    So if it is mostly about the frequency of the radiation, then computer networks are more harmful than telephones etc. However, both would be utterly overshadowed by visible light, which would probably kill you on the spot. So I conclude that both telephones and computer networks emit a kind of radiation that is virtually harmless. I don't say it's completely hardmless, but if you're going to be afraid of that then you had better spend your energy being afraid of sunlight.

    I hope that clears things up. I believe these are some of the most scientifically justified posts on this forum, so if that's not enough to convince you then by all means go and be afraid of cellphones, computer networks and radio signals. As you will have noticed they go through the wall of your house, but building a underground bunker should do the trick. Put some metal in the wall because of the Faraday effect; buildings with a lot of metal usually have poor telephone reception. Talking about scary radiation, did you know more than 50 trillion solar neutrinos pass through the human body every second at speeds close to that of light? Maybe adapt your bunker to that as well... Sorry for the sarcasm people.

    Kind regards,

    Mark

    Did anyone notice the wordplay on "overshadowed by sisible light"?

  • M42M42

    What I said has nothing to do with the distance of the sun. It was the energy (frequency) per photon (light particle), which doesn't change when the sun comes closer or goes further away. I already spoke about the intensity and distance in my first post, and I think I said that I don't see computer networks as dangerous specifically because they have such low intensities (apparent from their short reach given the frequency).

    What you say is this. Microwaves emit the same radiation routers do. If you put your head inside a microwave and somehow get it to turn on, you'll get overheated and die. Therefore, you don't want to sit close to a router, because over time the same thing may happen. Now look at this analogy: ovens emit the same kind of raditation and heat candles do. If you put your head inside an oven and turn it on, you'll get overheated and die after a short while. Therefore, you don't want to sit close to a clande, because over time the sam thing may happen. Does that really make sense?

    Well, I'm not going to avoid wifi-routers but if others want to do so that's fine of course; doesn't hurt anyone if that's what you want to do. But if you want my advice, spend your time avoiding cars instead, they have killed many more people than routers seem to have.

  • 00 Raw Newbie

    I have avoided cars... Don't even have one! Or a license. ;) But even if I did have one, what does a car (or the person driving the car) killing someone have to do with this subject? Cars only affect people instantaneously upon impact, not over time.

    Belittling someone because they believe something unseen hurts them is wrong. I believe certain radiation frequencies (that aren't visible to the naked eye) can cause people harm, especially over time. So to you, my comparing microwave ovens to WiFi routers is silly and is the same as comparing a regular conventional oven to a candle? It shouldn't be. Fire and electromagnetic frequencies are NOT the same. We're talking about quality of health, not instantaneous death.

    I'm not stating concern that I'm going to "overheat" if I'm next to a WiFi router. I'm saying that prolonged exposure to one of these contraptions may cause cancer or other strange and unusual conditions that are not yet known. The technology is new - only in the last 10 years have cellphones really taken off and become ubiquitous, and only in the last 5 has WiFi become popular. Just because no one's instantly died because of someone suddenly turning on a cellphone, WiFi router, or a cellphone mast doesn't mean that exposure to these things won't cause harm down the line. There have already been cases of people feeling effects of electromagnetic frequencies. As I stated before, Sweden actually recognizes Electromagnetic Sensitivity as a medical condition. Even the World Health Organization recognizes it (just type in "WHO Electromagnetic Sensitivity" into your search engine...).

    People living next to high tension power lines have a higher risk of getting cancer, but many of these findings have been suppressed by government and corporate backed sciences. They even go so far as calling the people who believe in the higher cancer rates, or who have been affected directly (or indirectly through family members/friends) fear inducers and wackos. But of course, who benefits from keeping the public unaware of the health dangers affiliated with electricity, and who gets to suffer the side effects of being technologically advanced?

    Also, as you know, there are a wide range of electromagnetic frequencies. Ranging from radio frequencies to gamma frequencies, electromagnetic waves aren't as cut and dry as you dismiss them to be. Each frequency has a different effect on a human body, either being absorbed or attenuated by our bodies (which can disrupt the electrical synapses occurring in our bodies several billion times a day, thus causing medical problems), or even burning our bodies.

    Just because scientists refuse to research the long-term effects of these new technologies doesn't mean people shouldn't be cautious or that you have to shout from the roof tops that everything's clear. Maybe it is, but then again, maybe it's not. Many people who state they have electromagnetic sensitivity say they have several symptoms... Usually they say the symptoms are fatigue, memory difficulties, confusion/cognitive disabilities, tinnitis, skin problems/rashes, sensitivity to light, headaches/migraines, heart problems and the list goes on. I do agree that these symptoms are vague and could be caused by a number of things, but who's to say that these people aren't telling the truth or that the EMF isn't harming them until everything has been studied properly without corporate or governmental intervention... or with scientist egos blocking true research, for that matter.

    Whether their symptoms are psychosomatic or real, what I'm more concerned about is why scientists (who get grants from governmental agencies and large, powerful, and very lucrative corporations that likely invented/own the patents to/manufacture these electronics in question) refuse to truly study the effects of this kind of electromagnetic radiation. They only say it can't be harmful because of the same arguments you provide. The scientists that claim to have studied the health effects have only chosen to try to prove that electromagnetic sensitivity doesn't exist by putting patients in rooms and asking if they can identify whether a WiFi router or something similar was on in the next room. So then why is it that at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, they've published a study why Terahertz (THz) in large quantities is bad for you? ("How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA") Sure, these are THz, not GHz, but wouldn't long-term exposure to something that doesn't naturally occur in such concentrations be harmful? Doesn't sound like the science is settled.

    If you're so positive your cell phone, your computer, or your WiFi router won't do any harm, tape one to yourself while it's plugged in and turned on. Use it constantly, leave it on strapped to you, all day, all night for a year -- maybe 10! Then let me know how you feel. That is, by no means, scientific (since there would be no control) but at least will partially address my concern over the fact that no one has studied the long-term effects.

    Until someone has the balls enough to REALLY study this and (potentially) put their health where their mouth is, I think it's wise to be cautious around radiation-emitting and high frequency electronics. Failing to warn people about the potential risks of over-exposure is bad judgment and dangerous. I mean, we're on a RAW forum, for crying out loud... This site is all about health and common sense. And I'd like to think that the raw community has the common sense to be cautious about the things that can potentially cause health problems. This is a quality of life issue... You go raw because you want to enjoy a healthy life free from preventable bodily ailments. It's the same with radiation. You don't want to have the best diet in the world and think you're going to be the best-feeling person you can be and then get cancer because you left your WiFi router on all night every night for 10 years, or you were always glued to your IPhone with your Bluetooth headset permanently attached to your head...

    I understand that no one wants to hear that the technologies that make their lives "easier" - or at least more fun - are (even potentially) bad for them, but it just might be the same as convenience/frozen/processed food. One bite won't kill you, but surely eating it your whole life will cause you really bad health problems down the line.

    -----

    Oh, and there's actually a trick to disable the safety on microwave ovens so you can turn it on with the door open... And there was a case where the man who was on the receiving end of the microwave sued the microwaver. The man that sued (James Walbert) didn't die, but he definitely felt the effects of the microwave.

  • M42M42

    Hello,

    Well, I have nothing to say about radiation (or cars or candles) being or not being dangerous that I have not already said. But the other topics you discussed are interresting.

    Certainly people have the right to believe what they want if it doesn't hurt anyone else; I agree with that (and said so). However, for the thing that do hurt or offend other people, it's hard to draw a line. It's impossible to only believe and express things that don't hurt anyone (because every religion or lack thereof falls in the offending category, for example). If in people's views I have crossed this invisible line then I am sorry. Possibly I should have said differently. But the essence remains the same. If you have the right to believe radiation is dangerous, then I have the right to believe that is untrue and unfounded. And I do, sorry.

    Scientists aren't unwilling to research those effects. But scientists also need to eat and for that and the research itself, they need money. People at corporations that make wireless routers also need to eat and produce cheap routers, so they can't pay for the research; if they would, other comparable routers would be cheaper and if you would but the expensive one, you're an exception. There is an entity that you could expect to look after the wellbeing of people, namely the government. If they are not doing so, then I guess all the people that voted for them (the majority) don't really care that much. In the end, it comes down to being our fault. We're buying the routers and we're electing governments that don't research such things. Don't blame scientists for not having the balls to research it.

    Greetings,

    Mark

  • 00 Raw Newbie

    Why is believing in religion the same as believing something that can be proven/disproven? I understand, you do have the right to believe anything you want. I don't fault you for that. But there's a difference between true mathematical or physical studies and fairy tales or fables. Something that CAN be truly studied is here, and no one's doing it -- though it's most likely that people HAVE done it, but the findings are being suppressed (either by corporations that have the $$ to do so or the government that has the power also has vested interest in these corporations).

    Let's move on.

    "Scientists aren't unwilling to research those effects. But scientists also need to eat and for that and the research itself, they need money."

    ...

    "We're buying the routers and we're electing governments that don't research such things. Don't blame scientists for not having the balls to research it."

    I CAN blame the scientists for not researching it. They're the ones with the know-how to do the research. They may, as you say, "need to eat" and all, but true science is not supposed to be driven by money. Understandably, that's not how the world works, but it seems many people don't know how the world works.

    How can you say that citizens/common people are at fault for corporations pushing potentially dangerous products on us because we don't vote for the proper people? That just sounds completely misanthropic (though I'm not accusing you of that) and illogical. The best term I can come up with for that is capitulation. For people who believe they have no power, to just relinquish every power they do have to the entity they believe is truly in power. Well, governments and corporations are powerful, and I'm not, so I don't deserve to know the whole truth. Lets buy a cell phone and curl up next to my WiFi router every night.!

    "There is an entity that you could expect to look after the wellbeing of people, namely the government. If they are not doing so, then I guess all the people that voted for them (the majority) don't really care that much."

    Guess what? On the whole, the majority of the US population DOESN'T vote, with the exception of presidential elections, and with that only a small majority. The small amount of people that do vote (roughly about 54% during presidential elections, and around 45-40% on non-presidential election years) only get two choices that are likely to win, with the rest of the people running having no chance at all due to media thrashings or blackouts of the third-party candidates. The people that don't vote, don't mostly because they believe their vote doesn't mean anything at all. Because guess what? Their vote DOESN'T mean anything. It's simple! Corporations decide which candidate they like, they fund their campaign, and the losers who get brainwashed by the campaign vote for the person whose face they see more, or the best looking one, or even the one that sounds the nicest. Nowadays, people may beg to differ, but platitudes are always the same every single election year and nothing changes whether people vote or not. We still have wars, we still have corruption, we still have poverty, famine, and suffering.

    Besides, the government and the corporations are the ones that fund electromagnetic research, and they're the ones that know there's something up. I mean, every WiFi router, every cell phone COMES with a disclaimer that warns people of possible overexposure. So there ARE studies of the effects of electromagnetic radiation from electrical devices... They're just not published (like I said, suppressed by the corporations/governments that have vested interest). If there weren't any findings that the type of radiation emitted from their device was harmful, why would they have to warn you about it? I mean, if their product was completely safe, they shouldn't be worried that someone along the lines would sue them for not disclosing such information, right? Oh, but I guess that's all the voters' fault for not caring about what they don't know, huh?

    And what of the people who claim they are sensitive to the EMF radiating from these electronics? Or the country of Sweden and the World Health Organization, both of which officially recognizes Electromagnetic Sensitivity as a medical condition? In that case, it's "proven" to these bodies of power that one can be harmed by EMF.

    Again, shouting from the rooftops that all is OK with every single electronic device's EMF output is irresponsible, especially in a thread where the original author was asking for advice to minimize exposure. Spreading information that all EMF that's less intense than the sun is harmless, especially when it has yet to be studied or has yet to be publicly proven/disproven, is not wise. (Besides, didn't I post the link to MIT's DNA-damaging terahertz study? I'm sure I did, but here it is again: How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA)

    But, by all means, continue to believe it won't harm you. I just hope you decide to lessen the amount of usage of your own cell phone, computer, and WiFi router, if not just to lessen EMF exposure but to also be free of the confines of the digital age. (Nature is fun, too! :) ) Whenever people ask for advice about anything that hasn't been studied (or the study hasn't been peer-reviewed/published), I always say to be cautious. Use your best judgment. Just because it seems like it can't harm you, doesn't mean it won't.

  • 00 Raw Newbie

    As for Electromagnetic radiation goes, the sun does give off radiation. It's natural. We are children of the sun - it's radiation is necessary for us to live. Ever heard of a little thing called Vitamin D? Yeah, our skin needs the UV radiation the sun gives off to produce it to keep our bodies healthy. Our bodies can take it, but our bodies also know that too much is bad for us. We know our limits, so we seek shade or we get burned.

    It's the same with cellphones, WiFi, etc. While the radiation emitted from the electronic devices is NOT natural, our bodies SHOULD know our limits, but so many people don't listen to the messages our bodies tell us. It's easy to say the sun is millions of times stronger than a computer, cellphone, cell tower, or WiFi router. It's just fact. But what is closer in proximity to us everyday? Just because you don't think you feel any effects of overexposure to your cellphone or your WiFi doesn't mean your body hasn't tried to tell you to stay away... or at least "seek some shade."

    Here's a little fact... Microwave ovens (yuck!) use radiation to vibrate water molecules to cause friction to ultimately heat so-called "food." The average microwave oven operates at 2.45 gigahertz (GHz). Everyone knows that if you stuck your head in there and turned it on, you'd die... or at least get cancer or some crazy disease.

    Here's another fact. WiFi routers operate at 2.4 GHz (most common) and 5 GHz (newer "faster" routers).

    Cellphones operate at anywhere between 800 megahertz (MHz) to 2.7GHz in the US, depending on your service provider.

    Plenty of computers work at 2.5GHz, maybe less if it's older, most likely much higher (closer to 3GHz or even higher than that) if they're newer.

    Now, WiFi routhers, cellphones, and computers seem to be in the same boat frequency-wise. And admittedly these are not concentrating their radiation at one spot to specifically cause heating. I don't know about you, but I NEVER want to sit near a WiFi router, knowing that it operates at the same frequency, if not higher, than the average microwave! But at least you're not holding it up against your head like you would a cellphone!

    I've always noticed I felt warmer when I was sitting near the WiFi router in the public library... And I always noticed my ear would feel unnaturally warm/hot after talking on a cellphone for more than 5 minutes. It's no wonder, since they work around the same frequencies as MICROWAVE OVENS!

    Oh, and there actually IS scientific evidence that proves that radiation from cellphones, computers, or just electricity in general can harm people. It's just suppressed by the companies that benefit monetarily from these technologies. Just tell me why in Sweden they actually recognize Electro-Hypersensitivity as an actual medical condition? Did you know in Germany they've prohibited WiFi in all elementary schools?

    And I've researched several articles by scientists that claim there is no way at all that radiation from electronic devices is bogus... but the only reasons they give aren't scientific. The tests they do on people who claim they're Electromagnetically Sensitive are NOT done to see the accumulative effects, just instant ones. Then after the tests are done, they poke fun at people by calling them Tin-foil hat wearers and they use "the science is settled" mumbo-jumbo without giving PROOF that these technologies are indeed harmless. Needless to say, that is NOT scientific.

    To limit exposure, I DON'T use WiFi - I use wired connections. I don't use cellphones - I use landlines. I don't watch TV. I don't set my laptop on my lap and I use a USB mouse and keyboard so I don't have to sit too close to the laptop and I don't have to be touching it all day.

    Diet wise, I'm raw, low-fat, and vegan. Feeding myself easily digestible food that's highly nutritious makes it easier for my body to fight off any foreign toxins, radiation, etc. Hopefully it'll be enough.

    Mimijona
  • M42M42

    Hello,

    Sorry for the short reply, time is scarce, but I think it'll appear equally unclear as my longer posts.

    I think there are quite some religious people that believe religion can (and has) been proven. I agree this could be a more scientific subject, but based on currect information, I believe router-radiation is probably hardmless.

    Of course you can blame scientists, you are free to. But if I'd be blamed for not using my savings to do some months of unpaid research, because no one else seems to find it important enough to invest money in it... well, I'd not be too offended by that. Maybe the world shouldn't work like that, but it seems to work like this: people need to eat, for that they (usually) need money, for which they (usually) need to work.

    I'm certainly not saying people don't have power. On the contrary, I'm saying people have the power to influence things like this, by voting for a government that does (or pomises to do) the thing they find important.

    About elections; if people believe there's no use in voting, or in voting for anyone other than the two main candidates, then I can't feel very sorry. If you don't try to change something, live with the consequences.

    If there are people who are sensetive to router radiation, it may be a hint that it's dangerous to everyone but it's certainly no proof. I'm sensetive grasses in spring seeds, but that seems to be mostly hardless to most people (luckily; would hate it to have all grass burnt).

    Isn't asking for advise to prevent radiation expose strongly suggesting that radiation is dangerous? In the same way I suggest that it probably is not, only I provided arguments? I agree, neither me nor the poster nor anyone else can yet be completely sure (well, completely is impossible anyway, but there is some margin of coubt). But I do think one option is much more likely, and that it's not worth spending all the effort preventing this radiation.

    As closing, I'd find it fine if there'd be more research into this. But until that's done, based on aviable information and logic, I find it likely that radiation isn't very hardmful to people who aren't oversensetive to it. And because of that, I can understand there's no big urge to spend a lot of money on reseraching it. But of course you may interpret the information your way, as may everyone.

    If you find it very important, you may want to find like-minded people and collect money to have research done into it. I would find that a very good endeavour. I'm afraid I wouldn't support it, because I personally expect it'd turn out to be harmless so I'd spend my money on something like figting global warming. But nevertheless, if you really find something important, I strongly encourage you to do something like this. It'll help more than arguing on a forum with some stranger!

    Greetings,

    Mark

  • Interesting topic.... I had heard flying exposes us to alot of radiation... I'll have to come back and finish reading the entries.

  • 00 Raw Newbie

    Again, if cell phone companies and manufacturers that utilize WiFi in their products (like Linksys and Nintendo) had no inkling that overexposure to GHz could cause health problems over time why does every single one of their products come with a disclaimer that basically warns of overexposure? Corporations were created to limit liability so they would and could not be destroyed by a consumer's will. They know all procedures to keep themselves out of legal tangles and maximize profit. So, of course, they have studies that show GHz is harmful if one is overexposed to high concentrations of it, and the corporations have protected themselves by making it so the people who are addicted to their products can't sue for any health damage the product has caused them.

    And again, I've mentioned that both Sweden and the World Health Organization both recognize Electromagnetic Sensitivity as a medical condition. That country and that organization would definitely not go to such trouble as declaring this a medical condition if there wasn't any risk at all in the use of electronic devices. You're saying that even though there are some people who are sensitive to it that no one else is at risk. Well, most people don't think they show symptoms or signs of cellular damage until they find cancer... I'm just saying...

    And in response to your statement:

    "If you find it very important, you may want to find like-minded people and collect money to have research done into it. I would find that a very good endeavour. I'm afraid I wouldn't support it, because I personally expect it'd turn out to be harmless so I'd spend my money on something like figting global warming. But nevertheless, if you really find something important, I strongly encourage you to do something like this. It'll help more than arguing on a forum with some stranger!"

    There are groups trying to do such research and a small group of scientists, electrical engineers, and even some doctors that are trying to get the word out and to try to get other scientists to peer review their research, but this topic seems untouchable to the mainstream media and public. This is exactly my problem: no one out there is even willing to entertain the idea that newfangled "convenient" technology could pose a potential health risk.

    I've already spoken to a well-known electrical engineer that knows a thing or two about the physical properties of EMF and electricity, Michael Neuert. He's been an electrical engineer for quite a while and has seen a number of different cases and situations of people affected by EMF. He told me that harm from exposure can be cumulative if overexposed. And like I've said already, there have been several studies, but none have been published to be peer reviewed, none have been publicized, and the ones that have been publicly talked about are unscientific and conclude by calling those who've been harmed by EMF emitted by electronic devices tin-foil hat wearers, stating that quantum physics is the "holy grail" without any scientific backing or explanation into how they came to that conclusion other than "but that is what the quantum physics laws state". It really doesn't matter how much money a small group puts into a topic of research, but it definitely matters how powerful the companies are that they're going against.

    I understand that you don't believe radiation from electronic devices can harm you, but you seem to be the one that's arguing with strangers online about whether or not it's really a risk. The thread author asked for advice on how to limit exposure, and you comment by saying EMF is not a big deal and that it's more logical to be afraid of photons and the sun. Your argument is strange because too much sun will harm you, overexposure to x-rays and gamma rays will harm you. I mean, too much of anything is bad for you, right? So, logically, electronic devices would also be bad for you if you used them too much. For your sake, I truly hope you lessen your exposure by at least turning off your WiFi at night and limit your cell phone usage...

    Oh, and one thing regarding quantum physics and the "fact" that anything less than PHz is safe... Didn't I post the link to MIT's DNA-damaging terahertz study? I'm sure I did, but here it is again: How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA)

    (The body scanners at airports use THz to map one's naked body, therefore bombarding one with extremely high amounts of THz that one's body does not come in contact with naturally, yet everyone flying seems not to mind that these levels of THz are damaging their DNA.)

    By the way, THz is way less powerful than the sun, so how does it harm DNA? Hmm... I guess it all depends on the characteristics of the radiation. If the THz that's bombarding travelers in the airport body scanners is non-ionizing but however still proven harmful to DNA, why wouldn't GHz be harmful if one were sitting next to/constantly holding&using WiFi/cell phones?

  • M42M42

    Hello,

    Well, I think everything there is to say has been said, so I will add no more to the conversation for now. You start every line with 'again', 'here it is again' or 'didn't I post', followed by something you already said. I've read it the first time, I've explained my point of view, if you're not convinced that is of course up to you.

    Thanks for the advice to turn my router of at night. As can be seen from what I have posted, I do not see the use and so will not. But I'll keep the option open for when there's more definate research. I would suggest not spending too much energy on avoiding low-frequency radiation, but I suppose that you too will wait for more research before changing your views.

    Kind regards and take care,

    Mark

    P.s.: that 'tin-foil hat wearers' thing was actually good advice to avoid radiation scientifically, to reply to the initial topic. It would look ridiculous on your head, but maybe wear a hat over it... and you can always put it under/inside your coat, covers a larger area too. Besides that, the best thing to do to avoid radiation would be to turn off everything that emits it, to move out of the city to an uninhabited place and to put metal in the walls of your house.

  • just read an article about exactly this!

    http://www.slate.com/id/2251432/

  • What do you do about vehicle emissions??

    Do you drive a car?? Or do you walk or ride a bike??

    Do you swim?? Is the water clean???

    How about the rain?? There is pollution in there too.

    Plus chemicals everywhere, in stores, washrooms, houses, vehilces, workplaces.

    Radiation from the sun can be harmful, especially if there is a huge solar storm coming......

    Not sure but computer radiation is pretty darn low on my list of things.

    A volcano blowing up could do some pretty nasty damage, and probably is now near the top of my list of things to stay away from.

    please see this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki

  • 00 Raw Newbie

    Hi, M42,

    The only reasons why I repost the THz study by MIT (which is what you're referring to, I'm sure) is because you don't even seem to have read the article since you haven't mentioned it at all, or the fact that this study actually disproves the quantum physics theory that any frequency below PHz is not harmful to human life because these are all forms of non-ionizing radiation... But if it's not harmful to life, why are there biological effects associated with these frequencies? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation

    And regarding your WiFi, I feel for your pineal gland... Hopefully your sleep pattern hasn't been disrupted in any way and will never be disrupted. I truly am concerned for people's health and that's why I feel that this is something that should be at least handled with caution. That's why I don't understand why people don't even think for a second that they should use such technologies with any sort of caution at all.

    Tin-foil is actually not good to avoid radiation. It has microscopic holes in it and can actually concentrate the radiation. ;) And I'm actually building a house in the country on acreage. It's not really because I want to get away from the high levels of EMF in the city (I've lived in the country for a year a while back, loved it, and I just want to have my own farm), but it's a nice plus.

    Hi brontesaurus,

    I'm not concerned with instant death by microwaves, nor am I concerned with imagined or psychosomatic symptoms. I'm concerned with overexposure over time. I would say most people have no connections to their bodies. Most western civilians aren't used to "listening" to their bodies or changing their ways to improve health. They think they should just be able to take a pill to fix whatever ails them. And while most people would agree to that, there are people who do listen to their bodies, and some of these people happen to search for natural remedies, change their diet, etc. Some of these people happen to be sensitive to electronic devices and can feel immediate effects if they are close to something they are used to, much like how someone is allergic to say, pollen or peanuts. When it gets in their system, they definitely feel it.

    Now physical allergens are totally different than radiation in the sense that the physical allergens can be countered with drugs. Microwaves can't; only by avoidance can they not harm someone. And, as I've said, it seems that overexposure is what should be feared here. There are actually people who have previously studied and used microwaves as weapons. They never used it to immediately kill people, but they definitely did harm over time. It's pretty scary stuff. Check it out - this man named Barrie Trower who used to specialize in microwave weapons for British Intelligence did an interview and has written several papers. You can type his name into any search engine and find documents written by him, and you can listen to the podcast here: http://www.pod702.co.za/podcast/bestofjenny/20100419JCWBEST.mp3

    Hi rawcanadian,

    "What do you do about vehicle emissions??"

    I don't do anything, except when I need to get somewhere in a motorized vehicle, I only use public transit.

    "Do you drive a car?? Or do you walk or ride a bike??"

    No, I don't drive a car. I don't own one, I don't even rent cars. I definitely walk and I do ride a bike. It's normal. That's my life.

    "Do you swim?? Is the water clean???"

    I don't swim. I don't know how. lol. Not that I don't think the water is fun, but seriously, I'd just rather be on land.

    "How about the rain?? There is pollution in there too."

    I know there's pollution in the rain. That's why I don't go out in the rain. lol... Where are you going with this?

    "Plus chemicals everywhere, in stores, washrooms, houses, vehilces, workplaces."

    I understand that... I only shop for food, I live in a wooden house that is quite old (built in 1907) and has wooden walls with no paint on them (actually looks really beautiful), so any chemicals that would have leached out are definitely gone by now.. or at least way less. The only thing I'd be worried about in this house is asbestos in the concrete foundation, but it's definitely not a problem unless I drill into the foundation. Again, I don't use vehicles. And I don't go to a workplace - I'm lucky enough to work from home.

    "Radiation from the sun can be harmful, especially if there is a huge solar storm coming......"

    Yes, we've already mentioned the sun can be harmful, since too much of anything is bad. But the sun is also beneficial to humans by aiding in the production in vitamin D, keeping away seasonal affective disorder.

    "Not sure but computer radiation is pretty darn low on my list of things."

    That's great. I just hope you aren't stuck on it 24/7. People should at least be cautious that there might be some health concerns with being around electrical devices too much. Again, too much of anything is bad.

    "A volcano blowing up could do some pretty nasty damage, and probably is now near the top of my list of things to stay away from.

    please see this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki"

    Yeah, volcanoes aren't the safest things to live near. lol...

  • David Wolfe has some info regarding "grounding" or "earthing" .

  • 00 Raw Newbie

    Check this out...

    Article -- New research: Electropollution can cause diabetes (type-3)

    http://www.naturalnews.com/028967_electropollution_diabetes.html

Sign In or Register to comment.