Cellphones...

Our "pub" where you can post about things completely Off Topic or about non-silent PC issues.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

RoGuE
Posts: 540
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:11 am
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Post by RoGuE » Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:52 am

MikeC wrote:(even boxer shorts!) designed to block emf
can we get a review on the EMI resistant boxers please?

MikeC
Site Admin
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by MikeC » Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:57 am

RoGuE wrote:can we get a review on the EMI resistant boxers please?
you do it. i'll try the silver threaded wifebeater shirt. :lol:
Mike Chin, SPCR Editor/Publisher
Support SPCR by buying your gear through this link: Amazon

lm
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 1251
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:14 am
Location: Finland

Post by lm » Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:17 am

Why did I not think of this earlier: To find out if the cause is indeed ultrasound, and if the problem is with hearing it, this could be simply tested by having earplugs on and seeing if the symptoms still come when having a powered cell phone near you!

If this would be the case, then I'd recommend custom made earplugs that match your ear exactly. I have two pairs and they are really comfortable.

colm
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:22 am
Location: maine

Post by colm » Fri Jul 16, 2010 8:34 am

I can relate noise free guy.

I can detect a computers micron level by beng near it..

a pentium 2 is not a 90nm pentium 4.. and thankfully, I can not detect anyhtng after getting 90nm and smaller.

I do not like my cellphone at all. I hate using it, I hate charging it.. in fact.. it goes dead more than stays on.

At this very moment, as my normal routine goes...
I have headphones on, and a song on repeat.. I still cannot sit near my computer without squirming around.. and I sit sideways to my monitor.
As I said, it is alot better today, than the older ones. the older ones were trying to kill me. :roll:

11 years.

I am seeking a jumbo button cellphone, modern version. My most content one had a phone cord, from the 1980s design od first cellular. I loved it..modern times do not however, it can't run today without getting hacked.

you are not alone with the electronic phenomona... I have no wireless for my pc, all is like the old days.
DSFg$57%udRTYnh

scdr
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:49 pm
Location: Upper left hand corner, USA

Post by scdr » Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:08 pm

NoiseFreeGuy wrote: Here is an interesting article directly related to what is being discussed here.
I'd be interested to hear from you and all the others here as to what they think of it. (They'd probably be interested in getting the teachers names/addresses so they could have them do some 'tests'.)

School Solves Staff Health Problems With Electrical Filters
http://www.lessemf.com/es.html
(Scroll down the page for article)
Since you asked for reactions to the article:

The article is of such low quality that it is almost worthless. No specifics (field type, strength, etc.), no citations to sources for details, from popular press (so purpose is to sell papers), selected by a site with a conflict of interest (trying to sell you stuff). The reporting is so bad that can't tell what may or may not have happened.

My favorite bit is the "fluke" meter. Perhaps to measure the number or probability of flukes, or "lucky or improbable occurrence[s], with the implication that the occurrence could not be repeated." ;-)
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fluke

Of course I am aware that it probably just means a meter made by Fluke Electronics - but the fact that they thought it more important to report who made the meter than to report what (specifically) was being measured or how large the measurements were just supports the observation that the reporter or editor didn't have a clue.

-----

Higher quality sources are more likely to be provide useful information.
For instance, the World Health Organization EMF project.

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/en/

Their "About electromagnetic fields" article provides a reasonable overview.

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/Whatis ... ndex1.html

(See the section "Progress in research" for perspective on media coverage.)

The World Health Organization is a leading international public health organization.

The introductory article could be improved by citing more relevant sources, but it gives a fairly good overview of the field.

The EMF project site also has links to research, etc.

scdr
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:49 pm
Location: Upper left hand corner, USA

Post by scdr » Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:31 pm

Also note, from WHO fact sheet on "Electromagnetic fields and public health: mobile phones"

"Further, research has not been able to provide support for a causal relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields and self-reported symptoms, or “electromagnetic hypersensitivityâ€

MikeC
Site Admin
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by MikeC » Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:56 pm

[quote="scdr"]"Further, research has not been able to provide support for a causal relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields and self-reported symptoms, or “electromagnetic hypersensitivityâ€
Mike Chin, SPCR Editor/Publisher
Support SPCR by buying your gear through this link: Amazon

Reachable
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 9:55 am
Location: Western Mass.

Post by Reachable » Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:35 pm

There is clear proof of EMFs effect on physiological processes whether or not one can extend the proof to actual symptoms.

scdr
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:49 pm
Location: Upper left hand corner, USA

Post by scdr » Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:21 am

[quote="MikeC"][quote="scdr"]"Further, research has not been able to provide support for a causal relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields and self-reported symptoms, or “electromagnetic hypersensitivityâ€

scdr
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:49 pm
Location: Upper left hand corner, USA

Post by scdr » Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:27 am

Reachable wrote:There is clear proof of EMFs effect on physiological processes whether or not one can extend the proof to actual symptoms.
Of course. Sun burns, vision, X-rays and cancer, laser surgery, vitamin D.

As with most things in medicine, it is a question of dose.
(How much, what energy, ...)

As far as non-ionizing, low energy, low frequency EMF - got any good citations?

NoiseFreeGuy
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:16 pm
Location: Guelph, Canada

Post by NoiseFreeGuy » Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:52 pm

lm wrote:Why did I not think of this earlier: To find out if the cause is indeed ultrasound, and if the problem is with hearing it, this could be simply tested by having earplugs on and seeing if the symptoms still come when having a powered cell phone near you!

If this would be the case, then I'd recommend custom made earplugs that match your ear exactly. I have two pairs and they are really comfortable.
I tried out your tests, as I have a full complement of ear plugs.
Although each test seemed to help with the pressure in the temples it was difficult to say for certain, as each set of plugs has its own occlusion effect, which translates into pressure in the ears.
So with a possible replacement of pressure from the temples to the ears,
it's very difficult to be certain, due to their proximity.

I tried out foam ear plugs, plastic ones and custom molded ones (25 dB).

NoiseFreeGuy
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:16 pm
Location: Guelph, Canada

Post by NoiseFreeGuy » Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:01 pm

The cellphone I'm currently using (haven't made an actual call yet) is the MotoRazr v3. It has a 0.89 SAR level (U.S.).
For a straight phone that's pretty high.

I'm looking at the SAMSUNG S7550 BLUE EARTH as a possible smartphone purchase. It has good specs and one of the lowest smartphone SAR ratings; U.S. 0.27 W/kg (head) 0.37 W/kg (body).

Does anyone have any personal experience with this phone? :)

scdr
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:49 pm
Location: Upper left hand corner, USA

Post by scdr » Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:38 pm

NoiseFreeGuy wrote: I'm looking at the SAMSUNG S7550 BLUE EARTH as a possible smartphone purchase. It has good specs and one of the lowest smartphone SAR ratings; U.S. 0.27 W/kg (head) 0.37 W/kg (body).
Why get a smartphone? I would think the main reason for a smartphone is if one wants to have it on and be using it a lot.
NoiseFreeGuy wrote: This cellphone will be stored in a drawer somewhere away from me (where I can't feel it)

I will be using it extremely rarely for emergency purposes on a long drive.
If you plan to store it in a drawer and only use it for emergency purposes - would an inexpensive (low SAR) plain phone make more sense? (Assuming such are even available anymore.)

(But I have no experience with that, or any other smartphone - not into the whole cell-phone culture. I have a refurbished just plain phone, which is off most of the time (even when I am carrying it). It is just for emergency use, or the occasional call when I am out and about. On the lowest cost prepaid plan I could find (minimum of $30/year, 240 mins)).

NoiseFreeGuy
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:16 pm
Location: Guelph, Canada

Post by NoiseFreeGuy » Tue Jul 20, 2010 7:51 pm

scdr wrote:
Why get a smartphone? I would think the main reason for a smartphone is if one wants to have it on and be using it a lot.
Good question.
A couple of incentives. First the phone would be much more 'user-friendly' (low SAR), could actually take it with me places for emergency calls.
Second, if it was a smartphone (wifi, camera etc.) I could see myself using it as I used my Toshiba e830 Pocket PC + digital camera.
I would look for a way to disable the phone on the unit and use it for all its other features. In the event of an emergency etc. I would enable the phone feature.
On the lowest cost prepaid plan I could find (minimum of $30/year, 240 mins)).
Similar to the plan I signed up with. $25/year, ~ 100 minutes.

xev
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:47 pm
Location: New York

Re: Cellphones...

Post by xev » Fri May 16, 2014 9:34 pm

Hi Noisefree, did you ever do any double blind tests?
I just finished a paper on this topic so i'm very curious.

I know someone else who has done a simple double blind and showed that they can in fact tell if a phone is router powered on & transmitting.

Also, i found several studies that supported EMF sensitivity, but there was something that either the researcher or some other reviewer felt was a little off or incomplete.
So basically some people have it and some dont. I also think it depends on physical wellbeing at the moment of being tested.
i5-6600K | G.Skill 16GB DDR4 3000 | Zotac 1050Ti | Samsung 850Evo 500 ; WD 1TB ; WD 3 TB ; WD 2 TB ; WD 6400AAKS

Antec P180B|Asus P5B Deluxe/Wifi|Intel Q9550 (2.8) w/ Kingwin 12025| Dominator 4gb + 4gb XMS2 @667|nVidia GTX 260|Seagate 200gb 7200.10|WD | WD 1tb | Sandisk Extreme 120gb

xen
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:56 am
Location: NH, Netherlands

Re: Cellphones...

Post by xen » Sat Jun 21, 2014 10:03 am

On the topic of double-blind tests: I personally interpret these tests as a way of questioning your own perception and your own intuition and placing formalized "doubt" into it. You are simply doubting your self. You are doubting what you see, hear, feel. And you think that by doubting you can come to certainty, and it doesn't work like that, because you are sabotaging yourself.

On the topic of cellphones:

I have this vision for the future:
  • All voice and texting goes through IP networks (the Internet data network)
  • Smartphones stop being phones and start being mobile Internet devices only
  • Smartphones become capable of being DECT base-stations and receiving and relaying calls from DECT phones over VoIP networks.
  • VoIP gateways for in the home become capable of receiving calls routed through other devices such as PCs, laptops and mobile touch devices. The only requirement is Ethernet connection, either wired or wireless. These VoIP gateways themselves are normally wired.
  • A standalone DECT base-station does not have wi-fi or Ethernet but it just connects though analog to a VoIP gateway. Allowing for analog voice recording with other devices (answering machine, phone recorder).
  • GSM/SMS is phased out entirely in terms of the non-data networks they use.
  • Mobile touch-devices retain SIM-cards but they are no longer tied to a phone number
Meaning:
  1. You can receive any phone call anywhere on any device
  2. No more exposure to high-energy radiation from wi-fi to your ear or body parts
  3. All wireless for calling is done using low-energy radiation such as DECT
  4. Just three standards: Ethernet (wi-fi), DECT and UMTS (or its like)
  5. Mobile calls and landline calls become integrated in the same VoIP structure
  6. Mobile phone calls outdoors require two devices: a mobile Internet device (DECT to UMTS relay) and a DECT phone (could be very small, handy, could be borrowed, you could just ask "could I use your DECT phone for a minute?" and it uses your own connection/subscription as long as you carry your touch device).
  7. Nothing really stops a touch device from being used as a VoIP phone itself, that's up to each individual in each situation. It is just not tied to a fixed phone number.
That's all. That's what I'd like to see. We/I basically just need a smartphone with DECT at this point.
Cooler Master Silencio 550 - Nexus Value 430 - Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-UD2H - Athlon X2 5050e 2.6GHz - Scythe Ninja2 - Samsung Spinpoint M8 500GB 2.5" - ZOTAC GT 640 ZONE
Antec P180 mini white - Corsair ??? - Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 - AMD FX 6300 3.5Ghz - Scythe Mugen 4 PCGH - Samsung Spinpoint M8 1GB 2.5" x4 - 8GB Kingston white Fury @ 1866 - MSI GTX 9?0 2GD5T OC

Post Reply