1. Curious

    Curious Guest

  2. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I think coming from people who say in the same article:

    It's pretty likely it's bunk.

    There's no evidence behind any of their claims, and the one paper they quote "'Childhood Cancer in the Vicinity of of the Sutro Tower, San Francisco" by Cherry, is about a totally different type of broadcasting, and other meta-studies have show there to be no statistically significant effect.

    http://www.sfdph.org/dph/files/reports/StudiesData/RadioFreqRadRpt032001.pdf

    The Author, Neil Cherry (who died in 2003), had a history of publishing papers that validated his theory that The Schumann Resonance signal had biological effects - and idea that's entirely out of the mainstream of science. His papers seem popular with people trying to sell quack anti-EMF/EMR devices.
  3. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The basis of the idea that there danger here is the theory that RF radiation has "non-thermal" effects. They claim that even though it's a very low level of radiation compared to cell phones (about 1%), that there is somehow a cumulative effect, as the meter will (eventually) be transmitting more.

    It's like they are claiming that taking a warm bath for an hour would be more dangerous than taking a bath in boiling water for one minute.
  4. Curious

    Curious Guest

    Thanks Mick for clearing this up and spending the time explaining. This concept might be the next fear mongering plot by the same group ( G. Edward Griffins crew) to fan the flames of anti-technology ideas. There is now a whole section on the Rense site dedicated to this new issue.
    http://www.rense.com/

Share This Page