Are WiFi and other RF signals causing harm to people

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

The Egyptians believed humans had 360 senses, not a measly 5.

They also believed in dog headed gods.

@ peck420 & Bedlam

I'm simply saying you shouldn't close your mind to ANY possibilities.

"A truly wise man admits he knows nothing" and all that jazz. Science is fallible. Sometimes people can sense things and science can't explain why. It doesn't make it not real....it just means science can't explain it.... yet.

If I even have one drink of something with aspartame in it I immediately get a headache in the front of my head. Before looking at the label, not paranoia or placebo... it really happens. There's something in it that I'm highly sensitive to.

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie
The only part of this puzzle, that science can't currently explain, is why some people believe the strangest things, in spite of all available data.

You are acting like we don't know what energy is transmitted by wi-fi. We know precisely what. And, we know that we are exposed to the same, from exponentially stronger sources in nature, every single day.

This is the fallacy in the vast majority of EHS claims (like the one you have presented). They all attempt to pin their cause on some 'new thing' that was introduced into their lives...without realizing that the 'new thing' is a substantially smaller version of an 'old thing'.

Although not using RF. This stuff is sorta interesting.

All of these are patents so they don't necessarily mean the apparatus' described will work. But if they do.....

A way to read ones basic thoughts remotely.
www.google.com...

If one could direct sound at a selected individual maybe this could help induce brain states such as forced sleep. Handy for greys trying to abduct people or people pretending to be greys.
www.google.com...

A way to, at a glance, again using directed undetectable sound and "white noise" to induce passivity in a subject. Awesome if you are a grey or performing a MILAB
www.google.com...

How to change brain waves via light shined into a persons eyes.
www.google.com...

This ones sorta creepy
www.google.com...

Using some doohicky to make people passive or induce sleep. Probably possible to do this remotely.
www.google.com...



There's this article.
defensetech.org...

that ringing in your ears might not be ringing in your ears.

for 'Nothing to see here' there seems to be more than meets the eye to my crazy People Remote concept. There may be ways to actualize my diabolical plan to control; oprah, women, and the pope for world domination. I'll drop the fake michael jackson and use Bio warfare instead with a bunch of cloned Beibers running around singing all out of tune and key thus making entire armies heads explode from the grating noise they will generate.

I believe it's possible.

If people can be allergic to water and sunlight, then almost any and everything can be harmful to one or more individuals out there.

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
"A truly wise man admits he knows nothing" and all that jazz. Science is fallible. Sometimes people can sense things and science can't explain why. It doesn't make it not real....it just means science can't explain it.... yet.

That's not the question in the case of the OP. The problem with ChesterJohn's claim is the data collected is not scientific. Science wouldn't have to understand the cause if an effect could be measured, what do you think dark matter and dark energy are? They are effects measured by science and we don't know the cause.

Now if someone had some scientific data to discuss then we'd have a thread, but contrary to the opinion of some people that anecdotes have scientific value, they generally don't, and the reasons why this is so are well understood.

I don't think aspartame ever should have been approved for use in liquids, and for a long time it wasn't as the dangers were understood. Its fairly stable in dry form but it creates toxins in liquids over time, and people may be reacting more negatively to the toxins than the aspartame. So if you stood in the factory and drank the aspartame sweetened liquid where the aspartame was just added, it would be relatively free of toxins. Of course nobody does that, and the longer you wait to drink it the more toxins accumulate.

But this thread isn't about aspartame, and I'm not aware of any scientifically validated causes OR EFFECTS from wi-fi, and the OP seems to have no interest in performing a scientific test.

originally posted by: Lostmymarbles
If people can be allergic to water and sunlight, then almost any and everything can be harmful to one or more individuals out there.

Who is allergic to water and what are they made of instead of water? Oil?

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

The 'something is watching you' sense could be a natural adaptation to be sensitive to other predators who might attack.

No idea what you're talking about with the TV.

There is no evidence about wifi allergies. If they wanted to really test it they would put the people in faraday cages and see if that helps em.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I'm sorry but I don't think that her mom saying she "thinks it was WiFi" is legit.

crippling headaches, tiredness and bladder problems brought on by electro-hypersensitivity (EHS).

Those symptoms can be brought on by depression and other things, too. I'd be interested to hear more about these bladder problems, though. Texting her friend seems interesting.

Regardless, these symptoms don't make people kill themselves. Maybe it's easier to blame WiFi than it is to blame absent parenting when their child is being bullied or something. I don't know. But I have a feeling we aren't being told the whole story on this one. I think it's probable that there's another cause. Wifi didn't make her commit suicide. That's ridiculous. Maybe it didn't HELP her existing situation (I'll be open-minded) but it certainly did not "make" her do anything. One doesn't hang themselves over being tired and having a headache and maybe a urinary tract infection. It was probably something to do with school. Her symptoms were probably psychosomatic.

A police statement said Jenny texted a pal at 9.36am and 10.05am telling her about her intentions and stating where she was but her friend did not have her phone with her. Recording a narrative verdict, Oxfordshire coroner Darren Salter said he was unable to rule out it was a possible cry for help because of the texts she sent to a friend. He said there was not enough proof to suggest Jenny intended to take her own life and recorded a narrative verdict. He added: "It can't be demonstrated to the required standard of proof that it is certain she intended to take her own life." The inquest heard there were no medical notes to prove Jenny suffered from EHS.

See? Right there. That sounds like normal suicidal behavior to me. It's a shame her friend didn't have her phone on her.

I'm not saying Wifi isn't bad. It probably is. You shouldn't have your phone always next to you and all that. But I do not believe for one second that Wifi made someone kill themselves. That's just hype and sensationalism.

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
@ peck420 & Bedlam

I'm simply saying you shouldn't close your mind to ANY possibilities.

"A truly wise man admits he knows nothing" and all that jazz. Science is fallible. Sometimes people can sense things and science can't explain why. It doesn't make it not real....it just means science can't explain it.... yet.

Except in controlled conditions, over and over and over, the people who can 'sense things'...can't. There is an explanation. And the explanation is that they can't.

If I even have one drink of something with aspartame in it I immediately get a headache in the front of my head. Before looking at the label, not paranoia or placebo... it really happens. There's something in it that I'm highly sensitive to.

At least with aspartame, there's something you might actually have an allergy to. It's a protein, you're ingesting it.

In this case, there's not. But worse, it's like you saying "I'm ok, if the aspartame is colorless. Or white. But not if it's tinted blue, or red"

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Bedlam

so what about doing it with microwaves at the right frequency and zapping a person with it. would that effect the calcium ions? like if I stand someone in front of a radar dish crank up the power and play with the frequencies other than potentially roasting the person, if finessed just right it would effect their brain or behaviour?

Well, I suppose that depends on what you mean by 'affect'.

You can cause some nifty buzzing and clicking sounds around 400MHz. You'll eventually opaque their cataracts, that'll affect their behavior. At 60GHz or so you'll start heating the surface skin in a way that's quite painful, which is how you get ADS to work. There's a lot of stories mainly centering around Rauscher and Bise that are confused at best, but you have to sort of set the stage with that one by understanding they also believe in Atlantis and little space buddies. And she was let go of her teaching position at a fairly prestigious university when she started going down that path. And it lacks that replicability thing.

There are a lot of studies that will tell you that RF does, and doesn't, and might cause changes in ionic balance. But not very quickly. And that it might, or might not, or does, or doesn't cause long term effects. That's because it's not very replicable, or it's very picky and people aren't replicating it well, or it doesn't exist, or it's down in the noise margin.

For a while, there was a lot of research into things like the Neurophone, which ended up being explainable and less than useful, and a big wad of your black money tax dollars went into investigating causing all sorts of neural damage with RF. Preferably the sort you could do from, say, a cruise missile trailing an antenna. THAT one went around for a while, although I never heard a lot about it after.

A really BIG RF pulse will kill you by direct E-field effects. You can also get "die" and "wish you had" from a nifty weapon tech that isn't fielded (afaik) that makes a big blurt of HPM right at your skin surface, whilst knocking you on your arse and giving you an unpleasant burn. Sort of phaser-like, but with longer lasting aftereffects. The reason you didn't get up right off (other than being slammed to the ground) was a mystery for a bit until they figured out about the RF part, and then that went off into its own research project group. So there's that.

so high intensity RF has no effect what so ever on how the brain operates?

what if I blast someone's noggin with em fields? or something that would induce an em field within close proximity of said noggin. wouldn't they penetrate the brain, stimulate neurons and effect the action potential thus giving me an in.

Well, again, it depends a lot on what you want for 'effect'. Consider - everyone's brain is different at the individual neuron level. And very complex behaviors require very complex modifications, one which you probably can't determine what it is, even if you had a way to do it.

Most diddling around with heads ends up being horrifically crude. There are a lot of things you CAN do, but most of them end up with the subject

1) playing dead
2) unconscious
3) not very useful ever again
4) seizing

instead of maybe singing "Puttin' On the Ritz" and doing a nice bit of choreography. The brain's not more conductive than, say, blood or muscle, it's not like you've got wires you can work on. So you've got to apply a #load of drive and just cause a lot of general damage with wavelengths that are about the same length as the neurons you're wanting to kill/damage and hope for a very general effect due to e-fields.

Detailed attacks are made harder by several things you can't get past. One, the higher the frequency the worse you'll just dissipate all the power in the skin. That's basic Maxwell. But the lower the frequency, the less interaction you get with small structures. By the time you're targeting small groups of neurons, you're into the THz region where it's not going to get TO the neurons. So it's a losing battle for small effects. Also, with RF, every time you change impedances you're going to get reflection and refraction. So air to skin, that's one, skin to muscle, another, muscle to bone, another, bone to CSF, another, CSF to brain tissue, another, on and on, and by the time you get to the structure you want to diddle, you've got a blurry low powered mess. With lots of heat where you used to have signal.

great there must be a way to achieve this. how am I going to take over the world now?!? my whole plan rested on controlling the Vatican with my pope remote (i wanna make him do windmills and b twists in the middle of mass to cause pandamonium and then continue on by fooling the world by abducting the real michael jackson and replacing him with a white Michael Jackson. next ill use the remote to control oprah, cause control over oprah means control over women, and with a army of chicks at my bidding I'll be able to take over the world.

just gotta figure out this remote mind alteration tech first.

Ah. You want behavior control. Well, who knows, there might be a way to do that. But not remotely. You're going to have to get your hands on the Pope for a few days. Might be difficult. Also, the agency is really tight ass with that one, worse than NRO and satellites.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Although not using RF. This stuff is sorta interesting.

You can't go by patents. I'm pretty sure I've read the ones you posted, and they've all got either 'miracle occurs here' or basic errors in their science at one or two points, even the ones from 'real' sources.

There's this article.
defensetech.org...

that ringing in your ears might not be ringing in your ears.

Heh. See your inbox.

originally posted by: Lostmymarbles
I believe it's possible.

If people can be allergic to water and sunlight, then almost any and everything can be harmful to one or more individuals out there.

I would group people who are "allergic to water" with the wifi allergies. Obviously they're NOT allergic to water, as they're made up mostly of it.

Sunlight contains ionizing radiation, which wifi isn't. You can have sensitivity to UV, not an allergy per se. And some people with very oddball medical conditions, like XP, can lack DNA repair mechanisms which cause them to develop all sorts of health issues from UV exposure.

One Wifi router is surely not enough to have an effect...
But 10 Wifi's, cell phones, cell phone towers, smart meters and Bluetooth all added up are obviously having various effect on living creatures.

I personally can't talk with my cell phone close to my head for more than 10 seconds before feeling dizziness and while most wifi's I don't feel, some particular laptops give me headaches soon after working around them. I'm a computer repairman so I see a lot of models all the time.

originally posted by: theMediator
One Wifi router is surely not enough to have an effect...
But 10 Wifi's, cell phones, cell phone towers, smart meters and Bluetooth all added up are obviously having various effect on living creatures.

It seems far from obvious. Studies are pretty much equivocal.

a reply to: Bedlam

thanks for your insight

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
The attached story is about a school girl who committed suicide because she suffered from allergic reaction from WiFi signals.rare allergic reaction to WiFi

While the story is sad, I now believe it has more merit about the dangers of WiFi and other electronic signals in our personal airspace.

I have often pondered WiFi being a problem to our health, 'they' do say the frequency isn't capable of causing harm to us as similar to microwaves, the frequency is not radiating. With radiation there is radiating and non-radiating. WiFi would be non-radiating. However with the current bombardment of many strong signals in our lives, it wouldn't be a surprise that it would eventually cause harm. However, mobile signals alone would be the most damaging. You try cut out mobile phones now however, from use, would not be easy. Mobile signals would be my first concern as not far from many households there are those mobile towards giving off lethal doses. Then you now have GPS signals going back and forth hitting earth, these are constant to.

originally posted by: BlackProject
Then you now have GPS signals going back and forth hitting earth, these are constant to.

Luckily, the power density of EMF declines as the square of the distance from the emitter.

GPS satellite signal strength is incredibly low. About 1.7 E 10-16 Watts per sq meter. As a comparison, a 100W light bulb 1km away puts about a million times more power through the iris of your eye.

Radio Frequencies from mobile phone networks or wi-fi do not harm people although extreme exposure can cause cancer.
When in low level exposure, these are not dangerous. The problem is when the secret service manipulate the human brain that these radio waves can be a problem as they are the perfect conduit for human brain manipulation by the government.

a reply to: Flanker86

I think we already established that the RF low level EMT and other waves in and of themselves are harmless. What we have come to understand is the long term exposure to the amount of waves we have today seem to be what are causing the body's self protection mechanisms to inadvertently cause harm to our bodies themselves.

The example given was like when you are around very loud operating equipment, your body's mechanisms cause the brain to secrete Endorphines to protect your ears from the harmful effect of the loud sound waves hitting your ear drums. It is a proven scientific fact that most workplace accidents resulting in serious injury and death happens 45 minutes into the day.

Why?

Because after 30 minutes you start to overdoes on the Endorphines and you become drowsy or at the least less attentive to your environment which results in accidents.

Now what would happen when your body is being hit with radio waves of different Frequencies amplitudes and modulations from different sources like CB radios, AM/FM, WiFi, Cosmic, Solar, electronic equipment of a multitude of variations and even from your car and Cell phones?

Think of the stress the body starts to feel after years and years of these non lethal harmless waves, it would be much like that of the worker around loud machinery except it takes a longer period of time before you feel the effects. Your body has been secreting small amounts of different chemicals for so long and some of these chemicals cause cancer, rashes, allergies, hyper/hypo thyriodism, cardiological abnormalities, Headaches, ringing ears, and who knows what else these defense mechanisms have caused over the years of exposure.

Now take a trip to a far off Island or way into the Forrest and stay for a few days. You fell relaxed and rejuvenated but it never lasts long for as soon as you get home it all start up again.

Solution RF free zones or rooms so your body can relax and heal.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Lostmymarbles
I believe it's possible.

If people can be allergic to water and sunlight, then almost any and everything can be harmful to one or more individuals out there.

I would group people who are "allergic to water" with the wifi allergies. Obviously they're NOT allergic to water, as they're made up mostly of it.

Sunlight contains ionizing radiation, which wifi isn't. You can have sensitivity to UV, not an allergy per se. And some people with very oddball medical conditions, like XP, can lack DNA repair mechanisms which cause them to develop all sorts of health issues from UV exposure.

Actually you're a bit confused on some people being "not" allergic to water. It's not the internal water or water that makes up the body that they are allergic too but the contact of water on their skin.

nymag.com...

www.md-health.com...

So, yeah people can be allergic or just about anything. Just because it doesn't make sense to others doesn't mean it can't be possible.