That cancer-causing tracking device in your pocket

originally posted by: grainofsand
but you making out your doctors cert is somehow proof is ridiculous

From my original post

For me, that is conclusive proof

Myself and my doc conducted our own research, and we came to a conclusion based on that research.
Your opinion that its ridiculous is like I said, your choice, but we should not assume that it is ridiculous just because you say so.

a reply to: VoidHawk

Nope, any assumption that the medical certificate means anything other than your doctor believed you IS ridiculous.


...now, if a medical certificate had been issued after some formal test resulting in empirical evidence, such as observed changes in your brain scan during exposure to radiation, then yes it would mean something.
In your case however, your doctor wrote the certificate based solely on your personal testimony. That means nothing more than he/she believed what you said.

You can wish for it to be evidence of your condition, but it is not, it is only evidence that your doctor believed what you told them.

*Edit*
Instead of anxiety/panic attacks as I mentioned earlier, how about back pain instead?
I could go to my doctor tomorrow acting out some terrible lower back pain and I guarantee I'll walk out with a medical certificate signing me off work with lower back pain.
That would not be proof of back pain, just proof that the doctor believed what I told him.
Now, if my doc sent me for a scan and found some disk problems then that would be evidence of the condition of course. But that is obviously different to a doctor signing something based solely on the patients testimony, as in your case.

Why you are so determined to make out your medical cert means anything other than your doctor believed you I cannot imagine.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: VoidHawk

Nope, any assumption that the medical certificate means anything other than your doctor believed you IS ridiculous.

But it wasn't about believing me, it was about the results of data collected. Please dont keep ignoring that.

...now, if a medical certificate had been issued after some formal test resulting in empirical evidence, such as observed changes in your brain scan during exposure to radiation

What we have here is a method of testing that fails to show results. And because that method fails to show results it is chosen as an approved method.
And because that method is approved, then any research conducted by patient and doctor is considered worthless.

And there lays the problem.

With so many people (its now millions) saying they are affected by mobile phones, maybe its time to conclude that the machine is worthless for this particular test.

originally posted by: VoidHawk
But it wasn't about believing me, it was about the results of data collected. Please dont keep ignoring that.

Haha behave, it was everything about believing you!
You collected the data, recorded the headaches and your mobile phone usage, presented it to your doctor, and he/she believed you enough to write a med-cert.

I say again, I DO NOT DOUBT THAT EXCESSIVE MOBILE USE CAUSES HEALTH ISSUES TO SOME PEOPLE, all I am tackling you about is that you are making out that your medical cert from your doc is evidence of your condition.
It is not, it is evidence that the doctor believed your record of headaches and mobile phone use.
The medical certificate was issued SOLELY on your testimony alone, that is not evidence of the condition.

originally posted by: grainofsand

It is not, it is evidence that the doctor believed your record of headaches and mobile phone use.
The medical certificate was issued SOLELY on your testimony alone, that is not evidence of the condition.

But we could say the same about the scanner.
The scanner is not evidence that nothing is happening, we just choose to believe it because we like its results.

As I said, its your choice to believe your source of evidence, but for me, and I'm sure others would agree, that keeping notes under the instruction of a doctor! is reasonable.

a reply to: VoidHawk

Yeah cool, but your doctor does not know that you suffer anything from using a mobile phone.
The only thing your doctor knows is that you have told him/her that you do.

I will be like a dog with a bone about this fella, you are making out that your med-cert is evidence of mobile phones causing you problems, that is absolute rubbish and you know it. The only thing the med-cert proves is that your doctor believed your personal testimony, nothing more.

I'll say it again in case you cannot see the relevance, I can go to my doctor tomorrow, playact like I have lower back pain and leave ten minutes later with a med-cert proclaiming that.
It would not be evidence of back pain, just evidence the doctor believed my lie.

I am not saying what you say is not true, but I will continue to shoot your assertion down that the med-cert is evidence that you suffer from mobile phone radiation. It is not.

a reply to: VoidHawk

Hi! No, what causes the vestibular malfunction is not the radiation.... let me explain.... The radiation doesn't cause the stimuli to the vestibular system, the noise does: the noise you get on one ear stimulates one side of the vestibular system and that causes disturbances in the balancing mechanism (which causes dizzines,etc). This is what happens. I'll try to find that article tomorrow, I can't even remember the name of the professor but I'll do my best to find it.



EDIT: I remember the symptoms were transient and not permanent.

Very interesting conversation, Grainofsand and Voidhawk, and what I am going to post relates to your conversation.
Voidhawk I can't find the article I mentioned , well, there was one but it costs $52 to access and I am not going to pay... BUT, I found something that is pretty much similar, actually better: a study on people who complained of your symptoms when using mobile phones.

First I found this:

Mobile Telephones Can Cause Dizziness, Nausea and Headaches.
With all of the recent negative studies an the possible risks of using mobile telephones, a UK researcher is questioning why more appropriate research is not being done in this area. According to Dr. Cox, an occupational physician, "there is good theoretical and clinical evidence to support the hypothesis that some people, perhaps 5% to 8% of mobile phone users, have transient symptoms of vestibular disturbance associated with their use." He also points to the fact that the number of people potentially affected will increase as the number of mobile phone users increase. Many of the people affected by mobile phones have reactions, which include symptoms such as dizziness, disorientation, nausea, headache, and transient confusion. The author suggests that such symptoms might be expected to arise from unilateral stimulation of the portion of the nervous system known as the vestibular apparatus, which assists in balance and coordination. Dr. Cox states that the safety research required on mobile phones is relatively simple and should initiated immediately.
altered-states.net...

So I searched for that study by Dr.Cox and I found it: www.mthr.org.uk...

The aims of the study:

Whether low-level radio frequency stimulation from mobile phones has any effect on auditory and vestibular function. Vestibular function was assessed by video-oculography, which enables recording of the vestibulo-
ocular reflex, and by the subjective visual vertical and horizontal test, which assesses a subject’s perception of verticality and horizontality in the absence of visual clues.

Participants were 9 cases that presented disorientation / dizziness / nausea/ with and without headaches + 20 controls that had never experienced any symptoms whilst using mobile phones. It was a blind study.

How did they do it? Each subject underwent a series of trials, in which a dummy mobile telephone exposure system was held, in a standard position, to each ear for 30 minutes in one of three different test modes. The device was programmed to emit a pulsed or continuous radio-frequency emission or no emission. In the active pulsed and continuous modes, the same mean power, on the same GSM900 operating frequency as the output of a typical handset was delivered.

Results:
there were no differences between cases and controls in all the tests. There was no significant
TEOAEs change from baseline recording to post-exposure recording for any of the exposures. No significant differences were found in the TEOAEs change from baseline to after each exposure between cases and controls.
(TEOAEs = Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions).

However, it was observed that all right ear exposures resulted in the SVV and SVH being displaced more to the left
than on baseline, and all left ear exposures resulted in the SVV and SVH being displaced more to the right than on baseline. This effect would suggest that any exposure of either ear resulted in excitation of the otolithic organ on that side. (SVV is subjective visual vertical, SVH subjective visual horizontal ).

^^ This minimal effect was tested and they concluded it was not the radiation but:

This minimal effect could reflect either the heating effects of the dummy mobile, with thermal stimulation of the labyrinth, or proprioceptive stimulation of the vestibular end organ by the weight of the dummy device, or the effect of a minor head tilt due to the weight of the dummy device, i.e. the so-called “E-effect”, which results in
deviation of the subjective visual vertical opposite to the head tilt.

Voidhawk, read the whole article when you have a minute, as it gives all the details I cannot add on my post.
I believe Dr. Cox wants to do the same study again but with a higher number of symptomatic subjects, maybe you should contact him as they need individuals like you that seem to feel unwell when using mobile phones.

Hope this is useful for you!

a reply to: VoidHawk

No comments about my last post, with the study you requested?