Having worked around very high level rf fields all my life I have a hard time with this. The items mentioned use very low power levels.
I would like to see some double blind testing of the people that are sensitive to RF. On Jun 30, 2016 11:12 AM, "Irv Smith via BVARC" <[email protected]> wrote: > In an engineering magazine I just read a disturbing article about EMF > problems associated with everyday modern things such as cellphones, WiFi, > Bluetooth, baby monitors, and smart electric meters. I couldn't find the > article itself online, but this TED talk covers the same ground: > > https://www.emfanalysis.com/tedx-wireless-wake-up-call/. > > Apparently the author is unusually sensitive to such low level EMF. He > experienced bad effects attributed to a bank of smart electric meters > installed near his apartment's bedroom. Note that his wife is a medical > doctor and also suffered various aliments. > > Many of us keep our cellphones in shirt or pants pocket. We've all been > warned that this should be a big no-no. Baby monitors are alleged to be > especially bad for a infant whose growing tissues may be unusually > susceptible to EMF. What about a pregnant woman with cellphone in a purse > carried next to her abdomen? > > The speaker points out that research on EMF that's funded by the cell > industry is not likely to find any problems — analogous to > tobacco-industry-funded research on smoking some years ago. And I haven't > yet seen any ominous ads by law firms saying "Call 800-xxx-yyyy if you used > a baby monitor!" > > 73 de Irv KK5QQ > > _______________________________________________ > BVARC mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org > >
_______________________________________________ BVARC mailing list [email protected] http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
