PDA

View Full Version : EMI - how far does it affect human body?



app_engine
18th June 2008, 10:01 PM
There seems to be a lot of studies on this topic, with conflicting results (often depending upon who funded / sponsored the study efforts).

While any reasonable person will agree that EMI (electro magnetic interference) will have "some" effect on our physical cells - as much as any other physical force can have on these, there are some questions for which the answer is not clear or possibly mired in controversies. Can we discuss them here and get some advice from experts?

-Does EMI from electrical/tronic equipments - especially cellphones- roast our brains / inhibit child growth / cause cancer etc?
-Does EMI cause harmful mutations on cells, possibly causing genetic defects?
-What are (or how to determine) the normal operating conditions of such devices to minimize / avoid these effects, if they are there?

Please do not bring in the angle of EMI pollution to entities other than human bodies in this thread, as for as possible. Let's focus on just this one aspect, which may be critical to our health and well-being.

Bipolar
19th June 2008, 11:23 PM
I think the evidence is unclear... I think at present, the consensus is that there is no conclusive evidence to say that using mobile phones causes cancer, but e.g. there are many other similar questions that have been raised - one that comes to mind is whether living near high voltage electricity pylons causes leukaemia (a type of blood cancer) - here too, the evidence is equivocal...

Personally I think there are many issues to consider...

Our lifestyle - at least in "developed" countries, and in some sections of the population in "developing" countries like India - people have less physical activity than in the past... this definitely has negative health effects

Diet - people these days seem to be eating more processed foods, which contain various additives/flavouring/colouring agents, preservatives, etc. The human liver is probably not very well-equipped to deal with all the artificial substances that we consume.

Pesticides/fertilizers etc. - these too find their way into our food, again the effects of these have to be considered.

Pollution - people, particularly men are more exposed to occupational hazards such as chemical pollutants - there is evidence to say that fertility rates are decreasing among men. Of course, in India, women too work on building sites, and they too are exposed to occupational hazards of a different kind, but they are probably not exposed to chemicals and other agents... There is also environmental pollution - pollution of water sources, pollution of the air, etc.

The point I'm trying to make is that when compared to humans about 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago, our present day environment is full of many other harmful agents - the overall effect of electromagnetic induction is probably not a very big percentage of the hazards we are exposed to. Just my opinion. :D I'm not an expert. :D

Bipolar
19th June 2008, 11:28 PM
There is no doubt that radiation is dangerous - but that is very high-energy, isn't it? I mean, as I said, I'm no expert, but I doubt that the electromagnetic interference caused by a mobile phone is strong enough to cause the same effects as X-rays or gamma-rays, etc.

Shakthiprabha.
19th June 2008, 11:33 PM
It may be of trivial importance to post this here. I actually am having ear problems.
Hearing is less in my right ear and dutifully my left ear is following the same pattern. I was told by my doc, over the period of years, hearing aid is the solution.

He ADVISED me to use LESS OF MOBILE / cell phone as the radiation cause the ear nerves to get WEAK.

app_engine
19th June 2008, 11:55 PM
One thing what I noticed with cellphones is they "feel" really hot when we have long duration conversations (which I don't find so much in the multi GHz cordless phone). I haven't bothered to check the frequencies at which CDMA operates (Sprint is CDMA here). However, it may not be > 1GHz and surprised at the heat despite operating at such a low power.

app_engine
20th June 2008, 12:01 AM
There are some basics related to cellphone effect here:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cell-phone-radiation2.htm

app_engine
20th June 2008, 12:06 AM
Further googling taught me that CDMA phones work at 800 MHz band (can also use the 1900 MHz band). Microwave oven's typically use 2.45 GHz, lower frequency than some of the cordless phones in the market.

Bipolar
20th June 2008, 12:16 AM
One interesting point - I have heard that living next to a nuclear power station carries less risk than using a microwave oven in your own home.

app_engine
20th June 2008, 12:30 AM
The wikipedia article on microwave oven states that there are some operating below 1Ghz too (not the home ones) also except they need more power for the same amount of heat while being able to penetrate food better (due to the wavelength).

So, effectively the cell phones can function as a micro sized ovens:-) Still, that's related mainly to the possibility of "mild heating of water content" in our cells. Can't say what hazardous effect heating alone can have (definitely mightier heat sources are around many of us, especially those who spend a lot of time in kitchen)...

Bipolar
10th July 2008, 04:13 AM
This (http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/163/6/512.pdf) German study concluded that "no overall increased risk of glioma or meningioma [two types of brain tumours] was observed among [the cell phone users who were studied]; however, for long-term cellular phone users, results need to be confirmed before firm conclusions can be drawn..."

This (http://www.e-emm.org/search_read.htm?page=294&year=2008&vol=40) Korean study (click on the "Full text" link at the bottom if you wish to download the whole paper; you don't really have to download the Korean font to read this, it's actually in English) was on laboratory mice, and concluded that "chronic exposure to 849 MHz and 1763 MHz RF radiation at a 7.8 W/kg specific absorption rate (SAR) could not induce cellular alterations such as proliferation, death, and reactive gliosis..." (basically saying that they didn't find clear evidence of harmful effects).