Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

  1. #31
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    I usually get a headache when I talk on a cell phone for more than an hour, and that never happens to me with land line phones. I'm not saying cell phones cause cancer but something about electronics definitely affects me. I usually have to switch to speaker phone if I'm talking for a long time otherwise my head gets very warm and I have a headache. Call it anecdotal but it's the truth.

    I do think on an energy level cell phones have to be doing something, but the same is true of all electronics so I don't see why cell phones deserve to be singled out.
    Talking an hour straight on the phone would give me a headache, period.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Could be the ergonomics of the phone. With landlines (do those still exist?), you typically don't have a glass/plastic screen pressed up against your face. My doctor told me that cell phone use can cause acne (due to that nasty, sweaty, greasy screen), so I wouldn't be surprised if they can cause some other ergonomics-related health issues.

    Radiation, however, isn't one of them.
    How would the ergonomics cause a headache though? I'm open to theories. I don't crane my neck when I'm on the phone or do the no-handed conversation.

  3. #33
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    How would the ergonomics cause a headache though? I'm open to theories. I don't crane my neck when I'm on the phone or do the no-handed conversation.
    But you might hold it differently than a landline in a way that you don't even notice. Or perhaps you use the cell phone under different circumstances (i.e. walking/driving versus sitting/laying). Or maybe you typically use the cell phone at a different time of day than the landline.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    But you might hold it differently than a landline in a way that you don't even notice. Or perhaps you use the cell phone under different circumstances (i.e. walking/driving versus sitting/laying). Or maybe you typically use the cell phone at a different time of day than the landline.
    I'm open to the ergonomics idea. I just can't come up with a logical ergonic explanation for why it would cause headaches. Thanks for trying, but those methods don't see to be problematic for me. Like, I can talk on skype for hours with headphones in my ears no problem, but a cell phone changes the situation.

    I don't know about the cancer claim but I do believe that, personally and anecdotally speaking, I think low frequency microwaves from a fixed source over a lengthy period can affect me. I used to live next to a train and the electromagnetic radiation of the tracks increased my frequency of illness. I expect people to call that pseudoscientific, but science doesn't know everything and it knows very little about how different forms of energy affect the human body.

  5. #35
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,022

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    I have to ask why we need a law requiring the posting? With a quick search of the internet I found a source that gives a radiation guide for cell phones. IMO a good consumer would reseach whatever product of significants that they were going to buy before puchasing. For those that don't have internet, there is the library. Cell Phone Radiation - 1,000 Cell Phone Radiation Safety Ratings
    If SF wants this law, yea for them. So is the next step for SF to post radiation levels for microwaves and TV's?
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

  6. #36
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    First off, the overwhelming scientific consensus is that further study is required.
    You're confusing two things:

    "There is no evidence that this causes cancer. Although there's no reason to believe it would, it's technically possible that maybe 50 years of it would, so we can't say with 100% certainty that there's no way it could cause cancer. Accordingly, we should check in on this again later."

    and

    "We need to study this much more because we don't know what's going on."

    The first is what actually happened. The second is what you're erroneously claiming happened.

    Second, you refer to the Board's action as requiring warning labels. That's wrong, too. You're batting 0 (zero) [nada] in this thread. The Board has required that the radiation levels be displayed next to the phones offered for sale. Posting radiation emission levels might be considered a public service by some or as an irrelevancy by others; either way, I suspect that the cell phone industry will manage to survive.
    Ah, harping on the distinction between a warning label on the phone and a warning label posted next to the phone. Cute.

    Moreover, you once again ignore the point - do you actually think this is going to have a real impact on consumer choices? Is the information posted next to phones going to impact your cell phone usage? Do you think people are going to see these signs and decide to go back to land lines?

    It's frivolous ****, on par with the vaccine-autism garbage.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #37
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,821

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    I used to live next to a train and the electromagnetic radiation of the tracks increased my frequency of illness. I expect people to call that pseudoscientific, but science doesn't know everything and it knows very little about how different forms of energy affect the human body.
    I wouldn't call that pseudoscientific, I'd call that stupid. First of all, we have all sorts of information on how different forms of energy affect the body. Also, on what basis do you believe that it was the "electromagnetic radiation" of the tracks that caused your increase in illness and not some other factor?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    I wouldn't call that pseudoscientific, I'd call that stupid. First of all, we have all sorts of information on how different forms of energy affect the body. Also, on what basis do you believe that it was the "electromagnetic radiation" of the tracks that caused your increase in illness and not some other factor?
    I'm very aware of my own body and outside sources are not relevant. I noticed when I lived next to train tracks that my health declined. When I was away from home my health improved, only if it was for a few days.

    Calling it stupid is closed minded but oh well, your choice. I don't care what "other sources of information" have to say. Statistics don't override my individual experience.

  9. #39
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,821

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    I'm very aware of my own body and outside sources are not relevant. I noticed when I lived next to train tracks that my health declined. When I was away from home my health improved, only if it was for a few days.

    Calling it stupid is closed minded but oh well, your choice. I don't care what "other sources of information" have to say. Statistics don't override my individual experience.
    I'm not contesting that you got sick more, I'm contesting your assumption that it was the "electromagnetic energy" of the train tracks that caused it. Just because two things occured in the same time frame does not mean they are related.

    You stated science has "very little" information on how different kinds of "energy" affect the human body. That's wrong. We have tons of information. I'm not talking about statistics here, I'm talking about physics. Seeing as how you have no physical capacity for even detecting electromagnetic energy, I think it's a pretty large leap for you to determine that such a thing is what caused your illness. Your refrigerator was exposing you to a stronger magnetic field than the train tracks were.

    Edit: Assuming the train was the only variable that changed from your previous dwelling (it wasn't) I'd suppose that the sound from the trains was a far more likely stress that caused illness.
    Last edited by Deuce; 06-17-10 at 09:59 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: San Francisco set to pass cell phone radiation law

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    I'm not contesting that you got sick more, I'm contesting your assumption that it was the "electromagnetic energy" of the train tracks that caused it. Just because two things occured in the same time frame does not mean they are related.
    Seeing as how the trains in my city operate on electro magnetism, I'm assuming it was electromagnetic energy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You stated science has "very little" information on how different kinds of "energy" affect the human body. That's wrong. We have tons of information. I'm not talking about statistics here, I'm talking about physics. Seeing as how you have no physical capacity for even detecting electromagnetic energy, I think it's a pretty large leap for you to determine that such a thing is what caused your illness. Your refrigerator was exposing you to a stronger magnetic field than the train tracks were.

    Edit: Assuming the train was the only variable that changed from your previous dwelling (it wasn't) I'd suppose that the sound from the trains was a far more likely stress that caused illness.
    I determined it through simple deduction.

    I'm not sure what your attachment is to disproving my claim which, to me, is self-evident based on my experience. Maybe you feel that the ways in which you understand the world are being threatened or something, I don't really know. I can assure you, it wasn't accoustics. I'm a pretty sound sleeper. People who live near power lines can experience similar effects, if they are sensitive to it. Not everyone is though, so I can't make any sort of universal generalization.

    I can only speak on behalf of myself.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •