It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
self-administered questionnaires for exposure assessment
The main conclusion is that although symptoms described as EHS Possible effects of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) on Human Health are real and may be severe and disabling, a relationship between symptoms and RF field exposure has not been proven. Most likely, the health problems described as EHS are not related to the physical presence of EMF and more research is needed to learn more about the conditions inducing EHS.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
For crying out loud, the very section you quoted states that there is no proof for any adverse effects!! Basically, they stated a few symptoms attributed to EMF...but fail horribly at showing any causality between the symptoms and the EMF.
Originally posted by unityemissions
Originally posted by MrXYZ
For crying out loud, the very section you quoted states that there is no proof for any adverse effects!! Basically, they stated a few symptoms attributed to EMF...but fail horribly at showing any causality between the symptoms and the EMF.
Oh my! Did you not see that I noted how ridiculous this conclusion was based on the data provided?! They are using the fact that the mechanisms aren't yet known to draw this conclusion. It's nonsensical!
You know what. I truly think this is a case where you two are set in stone on this one. I don't think there's any amount of evidence that could sway you guys, so whatever.edit on 29-11-2010 by unityemissions because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by rajaten
reply to post by atlasastro
The idea is that WHEN the pole shift happens, there will be an absence of the magnetic field.
You read my comment wrong.
Originally posted by rajaten
reply to post by Jwest06
Hey there Great pics and video. I'd only seen the first one before.
Never heard of the Ra channelings. Is that related to the theory of one or something?
quote from post by MrXYZ
Genotoxic effects The photon energy of radiation from mobile phones is much lower than the energy necessary to break chemical bonds. It is therefore generally accepted that RF fields do not directly damage DNA. However, it is possible that certain cellular constituents altered by exposure to EMF, such as free radicals, indirectly affect DNA. In most studies, the genotoxic effects have been investigated after short-term exposure (for review see Moulder et al. 1999, Vijayalaxmi and Obe 2004). The REFLEX study performed by twelve research groups in seven European countries, investigated basic mechanisms induced by EMF using toxicological and molecular biological technologies at cellular and sub-cellular levels in vitro. The REFLEX investigators (Diem et al. 2005) reported DNA strand breaks (measured by both the neutral and alkaline versions of the “comet” assay) in human diploid fibroblasts and cultured rat granulosa cells after RF field exposure (1800 MHz; SAR 1.2 or 2 W/kg; different modulations; during 4, 16 and 24h; intermittent 5 min on/10 min off or continuous wave). Statistically significant increases in micronucleus formation and in chromosomal aberrations were observed in fibroblasts as well. Nicolova et al. (2005) reported after a 6-h but not after a 48-h RF field exposure a low and transient increase of DNA strand breaks in embryonic stem cell-derived neural progenitor cells.
A Google Translate translation of the study information page on the Wageningen University website indicates "no clear cause" has been identified as to the increasing incidences of cracks, bumps, discoloration and tissue necrosis found on trees in urban areas.
"An association between the studied Wi-Fi radiation and the wide range of symptoms in adult trees can not be explicitly placed on the basis of the present study," the page reads.
Although the effects of multiple radiation sources and several trees were found, the researchers found it desirable to repeat the test and preferably for a longer period and on a larger scale.
Browse a distance of about 50 cm from the radiation source after a few months