Bio-electrical effects start at very low levels
It is now fairly well established that the IEEE/WHO/ICNIR standards for SAR and other exposure "standards" so called based on "heating effect" do not tell the whole story on the effects of exposure of humans of all ages, both genders and the range of physical sizes to RF at HF and above.
It has been known and shown repeatedly that there are bio-electrical effects that start at very low levels. Between 1/1000 and 1/10000 of the current "standard'. Further it is the type of modulation or intelligence placed on the RF that is significant; with pulsed signals being far worse then radio (AM or FM) and TV signals (that contain vestige sideband "sync pulses”) some where in the middle as far as effects are concerned.
Basicly the mechanism is beloved to be the cells and certain organs such as the middle ear, acting as a demodulator or detector resolving the envelope pattern of the RF signal. Where the demodulated signal has components at the various bio-active frequencies that are used for internal signals by the human body, they may be swamped by this "false" RF demodulated signal. These "false" signals interfere with the body's regulation at all levels from inside cells up to major sense organ inputs to the brain.
The results are to be seen at the cell level as calcium efflux, at the near level as false sensation, tingling, vertigo, sweating, cold sweating, tremors, flushes and other well known symptoms of RF exposure. In the limit, caused by the effects of direct RF exposure of the brain, hearing noise, seeing flashes, headaches, dizziness to the point of falling over, can be the result.
All the effects appear to be worse as the frequency is raised. A serious side effect of exposure at frequencies above 150 Mhz, (that is VHF and above), is that body parts can become resonant absorbers, which raises the amount of energy taken in, and reduces the threshold exposure level at which effects are seen.
The range of variation of human "size" of hand, arm, leg etc within gender and age groups explains in part why some people are more affected than others.
All the above has been widely known for some 40 years, as these effects were first documented by Russian scientists from the late 1950s onward.
When it first became known in the "West" the US/NATO (yes the Yanks), dismissed it as black propaganda. Since 1990 the IEEE have repeatedly attempted to "harmonize" the Russian standards by raising the "safe" levels in Russia upwards by 1000 times. The answer is still NO.
The driving force behind maintaining the high unsafe standard in the West (UK/EU/USA/Can/Aus/NZ) is the financial implication for the cold war warriors.
If the lower standard were adopted the MILITARY would need to purchase many square miles of land around their high power radar and radio sites to remove the public from areas where the lower standard said was unsafe.
The MILITARY could also expect to pay out vast sums in successful death and injury claims to ex-military and civilian persons who have been affected by exposure to previously consider "safe" RF levels.
Eventually common sense, and the case against the current RF exposure standards will prevail, as it did in the case of tobacco.
In the mean time we are all subject to passive RF exposed while the "cell-idiots" deafen everyone with their conversations and spread the risk of pain or death to all around them.
Message from dja.
PS I spent most of my working life involved with radio safety and radio propagation involving high power sites from VLF to millimeter waves.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/grn/omega051203.htm
It has been known and shown repeatedly that there are bio-electrical effects that start at very low levels. Between 1/1000 and 1/10000 of the current "standard'. Further it is the type of modulation or intelligence placed on the RF that is significant; with pulsed signals being far worse then radio (AM or FM) and TV signals (that contain vestige sideband "sync pulses”) some where in the middle as far as effects are concerned.
Basicly the mechanism is beloved to be the cells and certain organs such as the middle ear, acting as a demodulator or detector resolving the envelope pattern of the RF signal. Where the demodulated signal has components at the various bio-active frequencies that are used for internal signals by the human body, they may be swamped by this "false" RF demodulated signal. These "false" signals interfere with the body's regulation at all levels from inside cells up to major sense organ inputs to the brain.
The results are to be seen at the cell level as calcium efflux, at the near level as false sensation, tingling, vertigo, sweating, cold sweating, tremors, flushes and other well known symptoms of RF exposure. In the limit, caused by the effects of direct RF exposure of the brain, hearing noise, seeing flashes, headaches, dizziness to the point of falling over, can be the result.
All the effects appear to be worse as the frequency is raised. A serious side effect of exposure at frequencies above 150 Mhz, (that is VHF and above), is that body parts can become resonant absorbers, which raises the amount of energy taken in, and reduces the threshold exposure level at which effects are seen.
The range of variation of human "size" of hand, arm, leg etc within gender and age groups explains in part why some people are more affected than others.
All the above has been widely known for some 40 years, as these effects were first documented by Russian scientists from the late 1950s onward.
When it first became known in the "West" the US/NATO (yes the Yanks), dismissed it as black propaganda. Since 1990 the IEEE have repeatedly attempted to "harmonize" the Russian standards by raising the "safe" levels in Russia upwards by 1000 times. The answer is still NO.
The driving force behind maintaining the high unsafe standard in the West (UK/EU/USA/Can/Aus/NZ) is the financial implication for the cold war warriors.
If the lower standard were adopted the MILITARY would need to purchase many square miles of land around their high power radar and radio sites to remove the public from areas where the lower standard said was unsafe.
The MILITARY could also expect to pay out vast sums in successful death and injury claims to ex-military and civilian persons who have been affected by exposure to previously consider "safe" RF levels.
Eventually common sense, and the case against the current RF exposure standards will prevail, as it did in the case of tobacco.
In the mean time we are all subject to passive RF exposed while the "cell-idiots" deafen everyone with their conversations and spread the risk of pain or death to all around them.
Message from dja.
PS I spent most of my working life involved with radio safety and radio propagation involving high power sites from VLF to millimeter waves.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/grn/omega051203.htm
Starmail - 21. Jan, 23:21
