...you mean the name should be "dumbphones" ?? -----Original Message----- From: phartz...@gmail.com [mailto:phartz...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 5:55 PM Subject: Re: Cell phone radiated power
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Chris Dunford <seed...@gmail.com> wrote: > As Bob Park likes to say, Albert Einstein won the Nobel Prize in 1905 for showing that cell phones can't cause cancer. It seems to me that cell phone-related cancer is what's mostly rejected "out of > hand". Mostly that is what was said, but countless others said and adhered to the mantra that there was no effect at all. But, to now be seeming to rejoice in the claims of tremendous medical benefits of cell phone radiation seems like grasping at straws to me. I never once ever heard anyone suggest that radiation from phones would eventually be shown to be beneficial. Indeed, this is but one sole study that already has many debunkers. It does, however, appear to compound the evidence that suggests that cell phone emissions of RF are likely to generate changes at the molecular level in brain tissue. I'm kinda happy with my brain as it is, but thanks anyway. The point of my initial post was not to stir up the debate about cancer, but just to point out that smart phones are designed to emit a lot more microwave RF than do "regular" cell phones. Can anyone explain why that is the case? Steve ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** ************************************************************************* ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
