Slashdot Mirror

You are sooooo far behind the curve

http://www.rfsafe.com/

You could keep you passport in your RF proof boxers : $68.99

Pocket sized RF Shield : $7.99

or simply make your own garments from the RF Shielding Fabric 12x12" : $15

You are sooooo far behind the curve

http://www.rfsafe.com/

You could keep you passport in your RF proof boxers : $68.99

Pocket sized RF Shield : $7.99

or simply make your own garments from the RF Shielding Fabric 12x12" : $15

You are sooooo far behind the curve

http://www.rfsafe.com/

You could keep you passport in your RF proof boxers : $68.99

Pocket sized RF Shield : $7.99

or simply make your own garments from the RF Shielding Fabric 12x12" : $15

You are sooooo far behind the curve

http://www.rfsafe.com/

You could keep you passport in your RF proof boxers : $68.99

Pocket sized RF Shield : $7.99

or simply make your own garments from the RF Shielding Fabric 12x12" : $15

Hm, I'm not sure that I want to purchase product from someone who informs me that:

"Raping The Phone Can Cause A Increase In Power Out Put"

(Scroll down to the red text.)

try this

or make your own

When I was a shoplifter I used one of these works a treat for rf frequency shifting security tags.

http://www.rfsafe.com/ss/index.php/

I BRING WELCOME NEWS FROM THE land of great beer and limitless autobahn. There are signs that automakers are finally hearing consumer complaints about overcomplicated, bug-ridden electronics in cars. This matters a lot, given that the value of the electronics in the average car recently surpassed the value of the steel in same.

One bearer of glad tidings works as an engineer at DaimlerChrysler. Stephan Wolfsried, vice president for chassis electrical/electronics systems, is an Austrian-born 45-year-old who joined the former Daimler-Benz in 1983, and has seen a lifetime's worth of well-intentioned but glitchy systems and software "bugs" that turn out to be "features." Now he's in a position to do something about it.

"During the last year alone we have removed more than 600 functions from our vehicles. Nobody missed them. These were functions nobody needed, nobody wanted and nobody knew how to use," Wolfsried proclaimed at a recent Innovations Symposium hosted by DaimlerChrysler at its Stuttgart HQ. To its credit, the gathered press suppressed the urge to stand during the ensuing applause. ...

So what kind of "unwanted" features have been eliminated so far? Wolfsried pointed to an "anti-thrum" position in the sunroof of some Mercedes-Benz cars. With the sunroof completely open at highway speed, the inrushing air can cause an unpleasant drumming noise inside. Rather than reshape the opening or design more effective wind-blocking devices as Mercedes did in the past, engineers devised an electronic solution: When the driver bumps the switch to close the sunroof, it doesn't close. Instead, it motors to the anti-thrum position, partially closed, to reduce or eliminate the noise.

Unless the owner has spent lots of time with the owners manual or has an extra-sharp service technician, the customer may not understand. He may, instead, complain that the sunroof doesn't close the first time the button is pushed. And some technicians will waste everyone's time trying to "fix" such a problem.

Ditto the two-key-fob feature that customizes the seat and mirror settings for each driver--memory 1 on one fob, memory 2 on the other. But if the owner misplaces one fob, or tries to use the two keys interchangeably as he's done all his life, he misses his own memory positions, or his chosen radio stations. Then he files a complaint that registers as "customer dissatisfaction" in surveys.

"My conviction is that it must be possible to sit in a car and operate all the major systems intuitively, without an owners manual," said Wolfsried. He declared seven "categorical imperatives" for electronics.

Among them: The auto industry can no longer accept the software industry credo that "all software has bugs." The claim that this is the case, he says, is "an outstanding PR success by programmers. As if shoddy workmanship were preordained."

Then, in December, the government changed its mind, following a report from the Consumers' Association that said mobiles with hands-free kits beamed 3.5 times more radiation into a user's head than mobiles on their own. ... Simon Best, editor of Electromagnetic Hazard and Therapy, a specialist news service, agrees. "A choke would considerably help stop radiation from going into the head. It is not rocket science. A ferrite choke is a terribly simple little thing." [www.rfsafe.com] N.B. The official position of the Federation of the Electronics Industry on ferrite chokes is that they "work at some frequencies but not at others".

OK, basically this is what I've read. I don't go to stupid conspiracy theorist sites to get my info (because they're full of shit) -- I try to gather as much of it as I can from the published literature. And no, I don't quote things if they don't come from a reasonably reputable source.

As to what kind of problems, etc, read the WHO paper again -- it's fully referenced, so if you're determined you can go and look up the papers referenced. That would answer the "proven by who" and "proven how" questions. It also covers at least one of the proposed mechanisms (microheating).

The WHO paper covers this, but unfortunately they're rather fuzzy about it. So I'll do my best to clarify where the hell their numbers came from.

You can have one frequency modulated by another -- a harmonic. The microwaves could be considered to be the base frequency, and the ELF frequency (the transmit beat; described lower down) to be the harmonic. I believe this answers your "frequency component" question. (Please don't argue this; it's a waste of both of our time to argue about known things)

To answer your "What biological frequencies" question, I'll link you to this ass-ugly page: Brain wave functions. Yes, it's ass ugly; yes, it could hardly be considered authoritative; but, pretty much everything I've read agrees with this. This is all pretty solid stuff; don't bother attacking it.

Now that we both know what frequency ranges the human brain can operate in, let's look at GSM. GSM has a basic 'flash rate' of 217 flashes per second, an ELF frequency in and of itself, but not one known to be important in the brain or body (hard to argue -- don't bother; well documented). However, these flashes happen in groups of 25 -- which means that you have an effective frequency of 8.34hz -- this is where the WHO paper got this number. This is the 'transmit beat' (my word) referred to above. This is well within the frequency for alpha brain waves. The source of my info on this is unfortunately a vested interest (they sell products to protect your precious grey mush from cell phone microwave radiation): RFSafe on cellular safety. However, what I have used from this article doesn't state anything new; it just gives enough detail to figure out where the WHO people got their numbers.

I believe that answers your question about "biological processes".

I'm sorry if you think this is bullshit; it's my firm opinion that it is not. I have seen plenty of research in recent times on the dangers of microwave radiation. However, I also am not attached to this being a real problem; I don't see it as some kind of open-and-shut case of safe or unsafe. I'd love to see some well-referenced counter-opinions -- I'd love to find out that cell phones are a lot safer than I think they are (hey, it'd be convenient).

In terms of safety, there is no black and white -- things cannot be declared to be "safe" or "unsafe". It's all relative. And my original argument -- that CDMA is -relatively- more safe than GSM -- is rather hard to disprove. No body of literature indicates it's healthier to receives more microwaves with your brain.

As many of you know cellphones, and other wireless handheld hardware emits RF radiation at low levels. Since I am considering using a cellphone as my primary phone line (as in not paying for a land line), I realised that the use of cellphones in this manner is quite new (within the last 10 years lets say). I can't help but wonder if this will pose a health risk in the long term.

A recent study just published by Popular Science magazine found a "link between microwave radiation emitted by GSM mobile phones (the most common type worldwide) and brain damage in rats". Even "hands free" sets that you can buy for cellphones are believed to worsen the levels of cell phone radiation in the brain. Even the FDA website says that "There is no proof that wireless phones are absolutely safe". Most people ignore these risks because nobody is dying from cell phone use today, but could this cause a health disaster in the future? I am sure many slashdotters are quite attached to their cellphones, what do you think about this risk?

Use aluminum foil instead. It's a radiant barrier, and properly grounded, can also make a Faraday cage or wikipedia link out of your house. (ie, reduces energy consumption and reduces EM energy emanations from passing into/out of your house, resulting, supposedly, in lower health risks as well.

I think it's called a Faraday cage. They have one on a building at MIT.

You were pretty clear to me. Don't have the original article anymore, but the earpiece in your head acts as an antenna placing more RF in the ear canal (STRAIGHT TO THE BRAIN). Your audio wire will act as an antenna, because it is connected to the transmission circuit. Logically, magnetic signals are induced and transmitted into your ear.

As you hint at, a faraday shield can be quite cheaply used to inhibit the use of radio frequency devices. When a building owner is performing renovations it is trivial and fairly cheap to put up a wire screen between the steel studs and drywall. So, no special active devices are needed to inhibit cell phones, pagers, two-way radios, etc.