Are Cellphones Big Telecom's Ticking Time Bomb?
Are Cellphones Big Telecom's Ticking Time Bomb?
Dear DeWolf,
Thank you for sending me your report. It's fascinating.
Ironically, I believe the Telecom industry's "Stonewalling" of the problem has the potential of destroying the cellphone industry when they could take a completely different tack that would potentially preserve the industry. Should they begin by admitting a problem "may" exist and take action "just in case there is a problem" by removing the speaker used to place the cellphone to the ear (see Appendix 2 of the Reasons to Be Concern report), they would be seen as acting responsibly. [I wrote this in the tone of media spin, not in language I would use.]
Additionally they have patents for cellphones that would transmit in the near infra red spectrum (we call this portion of the spectrum, heat) as well as in the UV spectrum. Bringing these cellphones to market would enhance their "good corporate" image.
It's my view that using EMFs in a spectrum that evolving organisms were being exposed to from the beginning of life on earth is likely have no adverse health consequences. Life has not evolved while being exposed to microwaves, and thus health consequence could be expected.
On the contrary, if they continue to deny there is a problem until a pandemic of brain tumor suddenly is upon us (given a 30 year latency time, it's still too early to detect the coming pandemic), then there would likely be such fear/panic that all wireless devices would be rejected similar to fear/panic with radioactive material exposures.
You write, "I suggest you send your report to all named Wall Street Telecom analysts." As I am do not know who these analysts are, and even if I found their names, would not have their email addresses, could I ask you to do so? Indeed you may distribute our Report to anyone you feel should read it.
It is clear in reading your report, that you have information we do not have, and vice a versa. Would you be interested in a collaboration?
On page 3 of your report, you point out the US SAR regulation averages the value over 1 gram of tissue while, the ICNIRP guideline averages the SAR over 10 grams of tissue. For a given SAR value, if it is averaged over 10 grams rather than 1 gram, the 10 gram SAR will be 2 to 3 fold larger than the 1 gram SAR. C.K. Chou, a longtime employee of Motorola, was successful (with several years of intense effort) in getting the IEEE to adopt a new IEEE Standard that defines a 10 gram SAR. Traditionally the FCC relies on the IEEE standards. Though the FCC has yet to propose adopting the new IEEE standard, this is likely to occur soon. Should the FCC adopt this new "C.K. Chou" standard, though the 1.6 W/kg exposure value would not change, the effect would be to double or triple the amount of absorbed radiation allowed.
There will be a Conference (Expert Conference on Cell Phones and Health: Science and Public Policy Questions) and Senate Hearing in Washington DC beginning on Sunday September 13 through Tuesday September 15, with the hearing scheduled for Monday September 14. See http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org/events.htm for more details. Should you decide to come, please introduce yourself. I will be there.
Thank you so much,
Lloyd Morgan
510 841-4362
IF WE DON'T LOOK, WE CANNOT FIND
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=microwaves
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=guideline
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=brain+tumor
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=ICNIRP
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=C.K.+Chou
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Lloyd+Morgan
Dear DeWolf,
Thank you for sending me your report. It's fascinating.
Ironically, I believe the Telecom industry's "Stonewalling" of the problem has the potential of destroying the cellphone industry when they could take a completely different tack that would potentially preserve the industry. Should they begin by admitting a problem "may" exist and take action "just in case there is a problem" by removing the speaker used to place the cellphone to the ear (see Appendix 2 of the Reasons to Be Concern report), they would be seen as acting responsibly. [I wrote this in the tone of media spin, not in language I would use.]
Additionally they have patents for cellphones that would transmit in the near infra red spectrum (we call this portion of the spectrum, heat) as well as in the UV spectrum. Bringing these cellphones to market would enhance their "good corporate" image.
It's my view that using EMFs in a spectrum that evolving organisms were being exposed to from the beginning of life on earth is likely have no adverse health consequences. Life has not evolved while being exposed to microwaves, and thus health consequence could be expected.
On the contrary, if they continue to deny there is a problem until a pandemic of brain tumor suddenly is upon us (given a 30 year latency time, it's still too early to detect the coming pandemic), then there would likely be such fear/panic that all wireless devices would be rejected similar to fear/panic with radioactive material exposures.
You write, "I suggest you send your report to all named Wall Street Telecom analysts." As I am do not know who these analysts are, and even if I found their names, would not have their email addresses, could I ask you to do so? Indeed you may distribute our Report to anyone you feel should read it.
It is clear in reading your report, that you have information we do not have, and vice a versa. Would you be interested in a collaboration?
On page 3 of your report, you point out the US SAR regulation averages the value over 1 gram of tissue while, the ICNIRP guideline averages the SAR over 10 grams of tissue. For a given SAR value, if it is averaged over 10 grams rather than 1 gram, the 10 gram SAR will be 2 to 3 fold larger than the 1 gram SAR. C.K. Chou, a longtime employee of Motorola, was successful (with several years of intense effort) in getting the IEEE to adopt a new IEEE Standard that defines a 10 gram SAR. Traditionally the FCC relies on the IEEE standards. Though the FCC has yet to propose adopting the new IEEE standard, this is likely to occur soon. Should the FCC adopt this new "C.K. Chou" standard, though the 1.6 W/kg exposure value would not change, the effect would be to double or triple the amount of absorbed radiation allowed.
There will be a Conference (Expert Conference on Cell Phones and Health: Science and Public Policy Questions) and Senate Hearing in Washington DC beginning on Sunday September 13 through Tuesday September 15, with the hearing scheduled for Monday September 14. See http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org/events.htm for more details. Should you decide to come, please introduce yourself. I will be there.
Thank you so much,
Lloyd Morgan
510 841-4362
IF WE DON'T LOOK, WE CANNOT FIND
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=microwaves
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=guideline
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=brain+tumor
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=ICNIRP
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=C.K.+Chou
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Lloyd+Morgan
Starmail - 28. Aug, 05:32
