-Caveat Lector- Hi Bill, I may have gotten the wrong sort of build-up... I'm more of an activist and information researcher- distributor than anything else.. NO engineering background. Also, Roy sorta "jumped the gun" in adding me to his list- I'll hang in with it for a bit, but my email load is already near max. I imagine that IEEE is DOMINATED by industry hacks- everything ELSE is... :( Prob'ly Raytheon has a big say... It it my DISTINCT impression that the PCS system is designed to be useful as a E-war system against the public in the event of social unrest. A phone company person told me that PCS "hands free" car kits weren't available, and that PCS radiation is of no concern... scares hell outta ME ! (even BEFORE I read what you say about them) I don't know what I can do to help- what I'm doing NOW is probably about "it" - that is trying to stir up interest in the internet "public" ... I'll try to distribute EMF cautions/awareness to the netizens I communicate with regularly. best wishes, Dave Hartley http://www.Asheville-Computer.com http://www.ioa.com/~davehart -----Original Message----- From: Bill P. Curry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 6:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: EMF in classroom, was: Apple Computer adds Wireless (Hartley).... Dave, I just read your message on Roy Beavers' list. If you get an effort going to write a paper to IEEE, I would like to participate. I am an IEEE member, though not a member of the standards setting committee. Regrettably, you will find a good deal of intransigence in that committee. Their latest recommendations for tentative consideration for the 2002 standards (that will likely eventually be adopted by the FCC) do not even consider any of the relevant bioelectromagnetic research that has been conducted during the decade of the '90's. They are still mired in the notion that only ionizing radiation or radiation that raises tissue temperature can cause harm. This belies published studies showing disruption of DNA by microwave radiation at 2.5 GHz frequency and SAR levels consistent with cellular phone technology (by Henry Lai at Univ. of Washington on rat brain cells and by Jerry Phillips at the bioelectromagnetics lab at Loma Linda VA Hospital - at that time - on human blood cells). Also, the standards setting commissions seem to ignore epidemiological studies that show a correlation of increased probability of leukemia, sleep disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, etc. with closeness to RF and microwave facilities - FM radio, UHF TV. radars, etc. Further, because the standards on based on thermal effects, they allow higher radiation power density at higher frequencies; whereas, measurements of the dielectric and conductive properties of 30 different kinds of human (from cadavers) and animal tissues (from an Air Force report) show that the absorptivity of brain tissue increases with frequency in the microwave region of the spectrum. From UHF TV to PCS phone frequencies, the absorptivity increases by about a factor of 5. Another detriment you will encounter is the complete lack of interest of the FCC in requiring near field tests on cell phones, LAN's, and other microwave radiators. Their interest is only in protecting against interference between electronic devices, so they mandate that acceptance tests take place no closer than 1 meter from the source. This means that they completely ignore the higher harmonics of these sources that occur in the near field, but not in the far field - even though devices such as cell phones operate with human tissue in the very near field, and wireless LAN's also operate close to human beings. I have personally measured RF radiation density of 3,000 microwatts per square centimeter 3.5 inches away from an operating cell phone of the analog type. Pulsed PCS phones using TDMA technology have also measured in this range. One new pulsed phone that I tested had a factor of 10 lower radiation, but that was still 300 microwatts per square centimeter - which I think is excessive. I haven't had the chance to test a CDMA phone yet. Note that the FCC's far field standard allows 570 microwatts per square centimeter for the analog phones (with frequencies in the range 800-900 MHz) and 1200 microwatts per square centimeter for the PCS phones (with frequencies in the range 1600-1900 MHz), the readings I mentioned are 3,5-4.0 inches from the earpiece of the phone; whereas, the brain lies only about 1.5 centimeters away from the earpiece. Thus, were it not for the skull and scalp, the brain would probably be subject to incident radiation density of about 1 milliwatt per square centimeter. As it is, the outer tissues of the had absorb about half the radiation before is reaches the brain. This leaves still far too much radiation incident on the brain for safety, in my opinion. In my opinion, manufacturers could do a great deal to alleviate the problem of excessive radiation leaking out the earpiece, the mouthpiece, and the keyboard of the phone by just taking pains to be careful in matching impedances of the driving circuits with the antenna at at least the third harmonic, as well as matching impedance at the fundamental frequency alone - as they currently do. Incidentally, my measurements show that nearly 4 times as much radiation comes out the earpiece as out the antenna, half as much out the keyboard as out the antenna, and as much out the mouthpiece as out the antenna. You can shield the earpiece (very effectively), but how do you shield the entire phone?? I am a semi retired physicist who formerly worked at Argonne National Laboratory. I am not a biologist, but I have been reading bioelectromagnetic research papers and talking with researchers in that field for almost 2 years, and I have been involved in challenging the "wireless revolution" (sometimes in hearings) for about that same time. If you want to see my experience record in electromagnetics (but not bioelectromagnetics) look at my internet home page. Let me know if any of my expertise can be useful to whatever group you are assembling. I would also urge you to contact the EMR Network, of which I am one of the founding board members. (Address of the Executive Officer Janet Newton is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet address is www.emrnetwork.org.) This is an organization which is trying to get favorable legislative consideration of the hazards of RF and microwave radiation, raise public awareness of these hazards, and restore funding of the research that needs to be done to minimize the adverse impact of these burgeoning technologies on human health. Good Luck! Let me hear from you soon. Bill Curry Roy L. Beavers wrote: > > ......Dave has recently joined EMF-L.... He brings many new friends > who are interested in the technical/computer aspects..... Finding the > following series of messages to be of interest, he has forwarded them > to his list..... Thanks, Dave..... And welcome!! > > Roy Beavers (EMFguru)...... > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > .....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness..... > EMF-L web-site can be found at: <http://www.feb.se> > EMF-L archives can be found at: <http://www.wave-guide.org/archives/emf-l> > ..................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS.................. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 00:55:56 -0400 > From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: EMF in classroom, was: Apple Computer adds Wireless > > Hi NewCiv & Hi Tech friends: > > Anyone who felt so motivated may wish to take a moment to express concern > regarding the lack of testing in regard to and possibly dangerous > health-risk of children's EMF exposure in the classroom due to wireless LAN > technology. > Here are a couple of links- doubtless there are hundreds of companies which > SHOULD be interested- if only in the pocketbook, because of possible product > liability. > Interested parties with computer engineering contacts/background should > probably be encouraged to cooperate in producing some sort of white paper to > be submitted to IEEE questioning the deployment of this technology without > risk assessments; such paper should then be brought to the attention of the > legal departments of various & sundry (include Raytheon as well as myriad > smaller corps) and to the attention of responsible media contacts in the > industry. > Another tactic may be to attempt to bring the attention of the education > establishment to the potential risk, perhaps some cooperation could be > fostered between universities with "hi tech" departments who are pushing > this technology and medical teaching universities. (Perhaps with some caveat > as to accuracy and outside review- so as not to merely provide a legal > carpet for the potential damaging effects to be swept under) > This action area alone could provide full time work for someone interested- > as our funding comes together we may wish to consider this- a "health & EMF" > awareness advocate.... > > http://www.apple.com/about/feedback.html > > http://www.informationweek.com/docs/mast.htm > > http://www.commweek.com/contact/contact.htm > > http://www.wlana.com/ > > http://www.broadband-guide.com/expert.html > > http://isds.bus.lsu.edu/fall98/7520/WirelessLANs/links.htm > > http://www.wirelesslan.com/moreinfo/ > > http://www.iol.unh.edu/consortiums/wireless/index.html > > http://www.homerf.org/ > > (you may contact me for a small list of email addresses compiled while > researching the links above if you are so inclined.) > > Dave Hartley > http://www.Asheville-Computer.com > http://www.ioa.com/~davehart > ====================== > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 3:49 AM > > >From the EMF-l mail list; thoughtful thinking-out-loud about possibility > of harmful effects from introducing wireless LAN technology into schools, > along with the many other EMF factors now present in our world) > ============ > ......Bill Curry adds much solid info to the "LAN/computers in classrooms" > discussion below..... To me, he is adding another dimension to the whole > Blue World issue. > > We (society) need to develop an awareness about the extent to which the > electrical/electronic age is submerging human kind in electromagnetic > radiation from many, many sources that did not exist ... even a decade > ago..... > > It has long been my belief that we should stop talking about our exposure > from, for example, just power lines or just cell phones or RF antennas, > etc., .......We should begin to acquire an appreciation for the total > exposure that is around us -- and what that may mean in terms of health > consequences.... > > The recent case of the pilots exposure in their cockpits is another good > example..... And the magnetic field generated by steel-banded tires when > we travel, etc..... It is quite possible (seems logical), and is somewhat > supported by some of the studies in Sweden where multiple exposures were > studied for evidence of possible effects (Maria Feychting, Birgitta > Floderus, et al.) ... that our health consequences are (more) the result > of these multiple "Blue World" conditions ... rather than just the power > lines or cell-phones, etc..... > > Of course, that also elevates the importance of environmental situations > where our exposures are greatest -- like power lines near the homes of > children ... or LAN/computer exposure in the schools. which Bill discusses > below...... > > Cheerio..... > > Roy Beavers (EMFguru)...... > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > .....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness..... > EMF-L web-site can be found at: <http://www.feb.se> > EMF-L archives can be found at: <http://www.wave-guide.org/archives/emf-l> > ..................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS.................. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 20:07:15 -0500 > >From: "Bill P. Curry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Roy L. Beavers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: Apple Computer adds Wireless Option (Brown).... > > Roy and Gary, > > There are a few things I would like to point out to you: 1) I talked to a > lady in a position similar to yours in a local school district, and she > told me that wireless LAN's are much too slow for her applications. This > may be your best argument for defeating them in your school system. 2) At > a distance of 150 feet, if the radiation is omnidirectional, the radiation > density is only about 0.95 nanowatts per square centimeter, not very > dangerous. However, if the child's computer is radiating 0.25 watt and > he/she is working 1.5 feet away from the computer at the level of the > computer, he/she will receive about 9.5 microwatts per square centimeter. > This is not good! All this is true if each computer or base station > broadcasts equally in all directions. > > If, instead, directional antennas are used between the computers and the > base station, a child in the path of the directional beam would recieve > even more radiation. Further, you must add the radiation from all the > computers at various locations in the room and the base station to get the > radiation incident on any one child. I think this quickly gets out of > hand. 3) I am still afraid of 2.5 GHz radiation, because Henry Lai's DNA > disruption studies found extensive DNA strand breaking at that frequency. > Also, if you consider the wavelength in the brain, the wavelength is about > 1.2 cm (much shorter than in free space on account of the brain's > dielectric properties). > > The effective equivalent spherical diameter of an adult brain is about 14 > cm, so that the ratio of the circumference of the brain to the wavelength > is about 36.6. This value is well into the regime in which many spherical > cavity resonances can occur - if the brain can support resonances at all. > A child's brain is, of course, smaller, but will probably resonate also - > if the brain resonates at all. If resonance occurs, the radiation density > at the edge of the brain will be about 3 times the radiation density > outside the head on both the side of > the head facing the source of radiation and on the opposite side. > Slightly off resonance, there will still be field enhancement on the side > of the brain facing the source, but not on the opposite side of the brain. > This type of resonance in the interior of an object that scatters an > incident electromagnetic wave is called a morphology dependent resonance - > meaning that the frequencies at which resonances occur are dependent on > the size and shape of the object and the electrical properties of the > object. > > Can the brain really support such resonmances? I don't know. You might > expect the absorptive nature of brain tissue to prevent the occurrence of > resonances, but my calculations show that the brain absorptivity at 2.5 > GHz is not sufficient to prevent the occurrence of these resonances, in an > object that is symmetrical and has uniform electrical properties. > Clearly, the brain is not really spherical and not homogenous in its > electrical properties. > > Even if it is not spherical but is a symmetrical shape, this won't prevent > resonances, but will make them occur at different values of the ratio of > the circumference to the wavelength. Although the brain is not > homogeneous in its dielectric and absorptive properties, there may be > layers of the brain that are sufficiently homogeneous to support the > existence of standing waves appropriate to the geometry of the layer. > > I would like to ask the medical doctors on the list whether there are > layers of the brain that close on themselves and have fairly homogeneous > properties, so that they might support standing waves. I do know that > calculations in the literature that assume symmetry and homogeneity have > predicted waves at some of the same frequencies as are observed in EEG > measurements of brain waves. Even though these waves are much lower > frequency than microwaves, I am almost willing to bet that the brain would > support morphology dependent resonances in the microwave frequency region. > > The bottom line is this: I think the use of wireless LAN's in the > classroom should be discouraged - whether built into computers or not. We > may not be able to keep these devices out of the workplace, but we should > ban them from school rooms, in my opinion! > > Bill Curry, PhD..... > > Roy L. Beavers wrote: > > > > .......This is the LAN issue again..... Thanks, Gary..... > > Sounds like you needed to have some of your school board members > > present??? > > > > Re: "lap usage." I wonder -- would it help to wrap "you know what" in > > reflective foil??? > > > > Roy Beavers (EMFguru)...... > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > .....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness..... > > EMF-L web-site can be found at: <http://www.feb.se> > > EMF-L archives can be found at: <http://www.wave-guide.org/archives/emf-l> > > ..................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS.................. > > > > ........DO YOU KNOW OF OTHERS WHO SHOULD BE ON THIS LIST??????............ > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 09:23:00 -0400 > > From: Gary Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Roy L. Beavers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > Subject: Apple Computer adds Wireless Option > > > > Roy, > > As a technology analysts for one of the nation's largest school > > districts, computer companies are always trying to show us their newest > > technological creations. I sat at a presentation from Apple Computer this > > week with a dozen other individuals from my school district. Apple > > was showing us their newest soon to be released lap-top computer. > > Although the new colors and design were attractive you can't always tell a > > book from its cover. > > > > Half way through their power point presentation I was horrified to > > discover that the lap top has an optional wireless feature that operates > > on a wireless frequency of 2.5 Gig . The devise has an internal antenna > > and has an operating range of 150 feet to a relaying base > > station or to another Apple Lap-Top. Up to 8 Lap-Tops can operate off a > > single base station. > > > > The unit transmits .25 watts of power. This application is primarily for > > the education sector and would save the expense and complication > > associated with wiring. Each base station receiver/transmitter costs > > approximately 350 dollars and each laptop costs an additional 99 > > dollars for the wireless component. The lap top is about $1,500 each. > > > > When questions were entertained I asked the reps from Apple how much > > liability insurance they carried. Looking confused by my question the reps > > asked me why. I replied by asking them what would Apple do if the all the > > scientific research on microwave was found to cause maladies > > associated with mircrowave.rf exposure, especially rf exposure to a room > > full of children who are at three times the risk from this type of > > exposure? Apple relied that the company did not have a formal statement on > > this issue but they were in compliance with IEEE 's 800 standard. > > I replied that the IEEE standards on microwave were not especially > > applicable on microwave because the IEEE has not performed research to > > indicate a safe standard for microwave in this application. > > > > I also verbally listed a half dozen research studies that indicate harmful > > issues associated with microwave exposure from cell phones. > > > > I welcome any research on this standard if you or any other reader > > wishes to send it to me. > > > > My e-mail is as follows: > > distance [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Thanks > > Gary from FACTS > > -- > ---- > Bill P. Curry, Ph.D. |Physics is fun. > EMSciTek Consulting Co. |Trying to make a living! > 22W101 McCarron Road, |Phone: (630) 858-9377 > Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 |Fax: same, but require prior notice > > Home page: http://www.EMSciTek.com > ____________________________________________________ > | Analysis, experiment design & software development | > | for engineering and the physical sciences | > ---------------------------------------------------- > > ----------------------------------------------------- > -- End of forwarded message > ----------------------------------------------------- > > -- Jeff -- http://www.wellnow.com > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Well Now Health Information Service > Box 15524 Atlanta Georgia [30333] > --------------------------------------------------------- > "There's nothing left in the world to prove. All that's worth doing is > to love one another, using any means available to that purpose." > --------------------------------------------------------- -- ---- Bill P. Curry, Ph.D. |Physics is fun. EMSciTek Consulting Co. |Trying to make a living! 22W101 McCarron Road, |Phone: (630) 858-9377 Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 |Fax: same, but require prior notice Home page: http://www.EMSciTek.com ____________________________________________________ | Analysis, experiment design & software development | | for engineering and the physical sciences | ---------------------------------------------------- DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
