Mobile Phones and Lightning a Lethal Mix

An anonymous reader writes "In a letter to the British Medical Journal, doctors wrote that people should not use mobile phones outdoors during thunderstorms because of the risk of being struck by lightning. Usually 'when someone is struck by lightning, the high resistance of the skin conducts the flash over the body in what is known as a flashover, but if a metal object, such as a phone, is in contact with the skin it disrupts the flashover and increases the odds of internal injuries and death.'"

Comments

Talking in the rain

[nightsnack]

And this information is useful because we are always using our mobile phones out in thunderstorms.

Re:Talking in the rain

[gbobeck]

And this information is useful because we are always using our mobile phones out in thunderstorms.

Hey, look at how many golfers and fishermen get struck by lightning every year even though they should know better.

A few lightning facts that need to be stated:

1. Lightning strikes can occur on any day, even in the absence of clouds.
2. Lightning can strike 10 miles away from a thunderstorm.
3. If you can hear thunder, you are in range to be struck by lightning.
4. Contrary to popular notion, there is no 'safe' location outdoors to take shelter from lightning, although your car will offer some protection (read: its a crude faraday cage) provided that you do not come in contact with any metal object.
5. If you are on your cell phone talking to your friends and lightning strikes in the general area, causing you to scream like a little girl and soil yourself, and your friends hear it, they will not let you live that down for quite awhile. Doubly so if it is captured on video.

Re:Talking in the rain

[gerrysteele]

Stupid story. I bet more people who get struck are without mobile phones to their ear.

Ergo, I propose, via deduction, that you are MORE SAFE if you carry a mobile in a thunder storm. Statistics don't lie.

Re:Talking in the rain

[LordSnooty]

Doubly so if it is captured on video.

Heheh. In South London ver kidz call it "happy-(thunder)-clapping".

Re:Talking in the rain

[Orange Crush]

It makes me so mad when some loudmouth on a cell phone keeps yacking while I'm trying to watch a good thunderstorm.

Re:Talking in the rain

[KDR_11k]

Easy. If it's squishy that's normal, if it's crunchy the lightning did it.

Re:Talking in the rain

[nasor]

Lightening is one of those non-threats that people (especially the media) like to blow out of proportion.

There are an average of 73 people killed by lightening every year in the U.S. While each of those deaths is individually tragic, this is a trivial number of people compared to, say, forty thousand people killed in car crashes, thirty thousand killed by household accidents, six thousand people killed in workplace accidents, or even the average eight hundred people killed every year from non-lightening accidental electrocution.

Re:Talking in the rain

[fnord_uk]

I haven't seen that specific episode, but I have first hand experience of the interference potential of using a GSM phone in a Cessna 406 used for aerial work purposes. It did cause erratic behaviour of a number of radio navigation aids onboard, although I can't recall which ones.

Our workaround was for the pilot to fly using Visual Flight Rules (VFR) during cell phone calls and to prohibit the use of the cell phone (which was, in any case, legally prohibited by the UK CAA) when operating under Instrument Flight Rules (i.e. in cloud, fog, etc).

FYI, the worst case of airborne RFI I've ever experienced was when we flew very close, at about 400ft altitude, to the 'hot end' of the BBC Russian Service's antenna array. The instruments freaked out, Russian voices came through the intercom, plasma screens threw wobblies (before the computer driving them crashed) and a 1.5 amp fuse popped in the power feed to a sensor towed on a 100m cable.

Being a Slashdot reader, I've not yet discovered whether or not this intense RF exposure has left me sterile. The whole thing was quite amusing though. We had some 'interesting' times on that contract ;-(

So you're telling me...

[cwalk]

...I no longer need a nuclear reaction to generate the 1.21 gigawatts of electrical power I need?

Re:So you're telling me...

[troc]

But you still need a DeLorean.

Guess everone better take off their Levis then.

[ABeowulfCluster]

Damn rivets! Catching my doo hoo willy on fire!

Re:Guess everone better take off their Levis then.

[SomethingOrOther]

You can laugh matie, but I still have a permenent brand on my arse from when I came off my motorbike and slid along the tarmac wearing jeans.

The denim held up fine, but the rivit heated up during the slide and gave me a DEEP burn :-)

At lightning voltages

[Flying pig]

The plastic cover doesn't have any significant insulating properties. This is /. and I can't draw a diagram, but the insulation probably can't withstand more than about 10kV. For an analogy in relative terms, would you feel safe if the mains wiring in your house was insulated with nothing but a fine layer of dust?

Re:Metal objects ?

[Aglassis]

Odd, my cellphone practically has no metal surfaces ...

Guess what, neither does air, and that doesn't stop lightning!

Your cellphone does have many internal parts that are metal (including conductive surfaces right next to your mouth and ear). If lightning can find a less resistive path to ground it will take it. Metal objects mean that lightning has to ionize a few cm less air (and if the storm is lucky, the human body will reduce the rest of the distance to ground).

Another disgusting pseudo-science article

[Futurepower(R)]

This is another of those disgusting Slashdot pseudo-science articles. Slashdot editors apparently spent their entire childhoods playing video games, and didn't learn anything about the real world.

Edited paragraph, without the nonsense: "The Australian Lightning Protection Standard recommends that metallic objects... should not be used (or carried) outdoors during a thunderstorm..."

The warning about metal and lightning has nothing particularly to do with cell phones. A tiny cell phone is not the biggest hazard. Don't use metal umbrellas during lightning storms.

Don't fly kites with metal string. (Or any kite. Lightning travels on non-metallic paths sometimes.)

In other news ...

[xav_jones]

Don't hold up umbrellas, large metal spikes or TV antennae. Jury is still out on iPods and tin foil hats maybe OK.

Re:Metal objects ?

[Ihlosi]

Guess what, neither does air, and that doesn't stop lightning!

Right. But if you get hit by lightning, you're pretty much fscked already.

Your cellphone does have many internal parts that are metal (including conductive surfaces right next to your mouth and ear). If lightning can find a less resistive path to ground it will take it.

If it has the choice between going through air/plastic and tissue, tissue will be the least resistive path. Even a mm of air has more resistance than the human body from head to toe.

Re:Mythbusters

[notaspunkymonkey]

I saw a Mythbusters show where they disproved the piercing thing.. they got some model heads (made of some kind of weird Jelly) one of which had its tongue pierced and they then caused a lightning strike to see which dummy got hit - they filmed it with high speed cameras which was cool - however - it was totally random which head got struck by the lightning- until they filled one of the heads with a load of nuts and bolts, at which point that got struck the most.

In other news ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Doctors find that prolonged submersion under oceans can cause suffocation, and that walking into an active volcano can result in extensive burn damage.

It is suspected that some natural forces can be injurious to human health. MORE FUNDING is needed to study these phenomena.

Seriously, every slash-dotter must be aware that conductive objects on or near the body - jewelery is the obvious and most likely candidate - will act as a focus for energy transmission during a lightning strike. Belt buckles and shoe nails used to be the problem in earlier times.

This can turn a survivable accident into a fatal accident. But should we all buy plastic-mounted diamond studs? Do we want to live forever? Or do we want to welcome our new insulated overlords.....?

Re:old wives tail?

[onion2k]

You mean "tale". Unless the women around your bit of the world are really weird..

Hello!?

[damburger]

I'm in a thunderstorm!

No, its crap!

*ZAP*

WTF is this about metal objects?

[bmo]

The best way to insulate oneself from lightning is to be _inside_ a metal object, such as an automobile.

Anyone who has seen the Electricity Show at the increasingly unchanging Boston Museum of Science knows that.

Lightning Safety tips, for the uniniated:

1. Do try to not be the highest thing around.
2. Don't stand under the highest thing around.
3. Don't lay flat on the ground if you are at a golf course or open field. Crouch.
3a. Some country clubs splurge and buy lightning detectors. Pay attention to the warning.
4. Seek freakin' shelter
5. 4 may conflict with 2.
6. Cell phones are the least of your worries.
7. Geeks should be more concerned whether the insurance covers the electronics.
8. The rubber soles of your shoes won't protect you.
9. If you are talking on your cell phone in the middle of a field during a lightning storm, Saint Darwin will announce "You! Out of the gene pool!" and take your soul.

and lastly...

10. **"The Australian Lightning Protection Standard recommends that >>metallic objects, including cordless or mobile phones, should not be used (or carried) outdoors during a thunderstorm," Esprit added.** So drop your pants and toss your belt buckle when the storm hits.

--
BMO

Re:WTF is this about metal objects?

[hackstraw]

For those that simply like to play the odds. Here are the odds of dying in one's lifetime so one in :

(For the impatient, lightning is 92 on the list, other gems are accidents, self-harm, assault, accidental poisoning, falling down, drugs, walking down the street, cars, bikes and things, fire, #28 is getting medical care, etc. Fun list!)

64 Nontransport Unintentional (Accidental) Injuries [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
118 Intentional self-harm [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
211 Assault [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
212 Accidental poisoning by and exposure to noxious substances [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
218 Intentional self-harm by firearm [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
228 Car occupant [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
229 Falls [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
247 Other and unspecified land transport accidents [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
264 Other and unspecified person [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
315 Assault by firearm [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
451 Narcotics and psychodysleptics [hallucinogens] n.e.c. [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
472 Other and unspecified fall [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
490 Accidental exposure to other and unspecified factors and sequelae [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
541 Other and unspecified drugs, medicaments, and biologicals [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
576 Intentional self-harm by hanging, strangulation, and suffocation [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
612 Pedestrian [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
675 Other accidental threats to breathing [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
679 Intentional self-poisoning [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
771 Event of undetermined intent [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
869 Occupant of pick-up truck or van [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
997 Other and unspecified means and sequelae [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1032 Other fall on same level [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1081 Accidental drowning and submersion [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1117 Poisoning [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1159 Motorcycle rider [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1179 Exposure to smoke, fire and flames [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1267 Inhalation and ingestion of other objects causing obstruction of respiratory tract [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1310 Complications of medical and surgical care and sequelae [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1366 Exposure to inanimate mechanical forces [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1433 Other and unspecified means and sequelae [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1471 Uncontrolled fire in building or structure [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
1796 Assault by sharp object [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
2331 Fall on and from stairs and steps [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
2811 Drowning and submersion while in or falling into natural water [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
3056 Exposure to forces of nature [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
3285 Other and unspecified drowning and submersion [[ more characters to get past the lame lameness filter ]]
3638 Antiepileptic, sedative-hy

Re:What about piercings

[William Robinson]

Yeah....

And what about my tin foil hat...

Now if you want science... Checkout the cows!

[GrpA]

Lighting information week...
http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/week.htm

Safety.
http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/outdoors.htm

Check out the line of dead cows near the metal fence.... I didn't see a single cow with a mobile phone in it's non-opposable-thumb hoof.

GrpA

Re:Metal objects ?

[leuk_he]

Or metal object like coins or jewels. no-one ever carries coins. Use paper money/plastic only! it is safer!

Are you kidding?

[Moraelin]

Are you kidding? Some people seem to not even have a life that doesn't involve screaming into a mobile phone. Yay for sitting next to the guy who's just got to tell everyone in his phone book that he's on a train, across from the codependent chick wanting to do everything together with her boyfriend and god forbid that they're not in contact at every hour (actually, she sounded so obsessed, she sounded more like "stalker" than just "codependent"), and a few other such specimens which can't just shut up for at least 5 minutes of a 5 hour train trip.

Frankly, when I saw this Penny Arcade comic strip, I thought I had actually been around people like that.

What makes you think that that kinda people would stop talking in a thunderstorm? I can just see the same specimens under some crude picnic/fishing/bus/whatever shelter, screaming into the phone, "YES, I'M IN THE WOODS! CAN YOU HEAR ME? IN THE WOODS! WHAT WAS THAT? THERE'S A THUNDERSTORM HERE! CAN YOU HEAR ME? THUNDERSTORM!" Or I can just see the girl mentioned above shivering under some tree in the rain, but unwilling to stop being in contact with her boyfriend even then.

Re:Are you kidding?

[$RANDOMLUSER]

I spend 3 hours a day commuting on trains, and my most hated saying has become "NO! I'M ON THE TRAIN! I'VE GOT PLENTY OF TIME!". I always know it's going to be a long ride after I hear that.

Forgive me for responding to the article, but ....

[Major_Error]

...I know, I know, I really shouldn't be doing this. But hey...

Is it just me that finds the 'flashover' principle slightly improbable? Now, I'm not a physics PhD (but then again neither were the *doctors* who wrote the letter to the BMJ, presumably!) but this was a notion first suggested by Nikolai Tesla. He hypothesised that he was able to pass the enormous voltages of his Tesla Coil across himself without feeling pain because it was so fast it 'crawled across his skin'. It has since been shown by far greater physicists than I that this was little more than a theory; it has no basis in Physical fact.

In actual fact, the reason he felt no pain was that the potential difference across his body and the floor (voltage to thee and me) was so high, and of such high frequency, that the AC current was oscillating faster than the nerves can respond - in much the same way as we like our CRTs to refresh at a faster rate than our eyes can, we just don't see it happening. As a result, his nerves never responded to the high frequency arc of electricity. If it was sustained, he would certainly feel his skin burn, and death would ensue (as continued high current has a nasty nasty tendency to do!)

In case it wasn't obvious...the arcs of electricity produced by a Tesla Coil are almost identical to lightning, in that they require a high enough potential difference to ionise the air to arc. He essentially shot (small) bolts of lightning across himself in the process of demonstrating his new-fangled AC.

So what am I saying? Well, I don't really feel the 'flashover' idea holds its own weight. Finally, who wouldn't expect a lightning strike to demobilise a person? If you ask me, she's frightfully lucky to be alive at all...

Maybe OK???

[Savage-Rabbit]

...and tin foil hats maybe OK.

Wearing a tin foil hat in a lightning storm is a win/win situation. If it works you are protected from lightning, if it dosen't work the lightning will melt the tinfoil and fuse it with your skull creating a permanent mindsheild to protect you from those cosmic mind rays plus the lightning will probably also fry all those alien implants.

Doctors and EE's shouldnt switch jobs

[Ancient_Hacker]

A few quibbles:

• There is no such thing as "flashover". The human body is largely salty water, an excellent conductor. There is nothing about the "surface" of the body that makes it a better path for conduction.
• Even if the surface were a better path for "flashover", that would be a very bad thing. That would concentrate the energy into the top layers, probably vaporizing off your skin. You need your skin.
• Maybe somebody read something about "skin effect", a real electrical phenomenon, but inapplicable to this case.
• If you get struck by lightning, you have much worse things to fret over than the exact path lightning took.

Old golfers' trick...

[jpellino]

... that if you're in an area prone to lightning, you should make sure you have a 1-iron in your bag.
When it gets dicey hold it up in the air - because as every golfer knows, even God can't hit a 1-iron.

Doctors and EE's shouldnt switch jobs indeed

[TrekkieGod]

Well, I'm an EE, not a doctor, so purely in terms of logic, I would agree with your arguments. However, evidence is more important than what I would deduce from current knowledge. Regardless of how I think things should work, observation of how they *do* work is obviously more correct. Simple googling on getting hit by lightning got me the following information:

80% of people who get hit by lightning recover and "lightning often flashes over the outside of a victim, sometimes blowing off the clothes but leaving few external signs of injury and few, if any, burns."

Now, I won't presume to try to explain exactly why that is because, not knowing much about biology, I don't understand the composition of the human body enough to even make an educated guess. However, considering it is observed to happen you can't argue that flashover doesn't exist.

bollocks

[RMH101]

You're arguing that tales of mobiles interfering with devices etc is an old wives tale. You counter with...wait for it...another old wives tale.
Way to go.
I'm sitting here next to a commercial ECG telemetry system. By taking a call with my cell phone and walking around near the telemetry transmitters, I can *see* the interference on the monitor screen. I can also *see* the interference as I walk near clinical trials subjects with holter ECG recorders on. I'm doing it now: the disturbances are also present in the electronic data captured from those ECG machines.
If I were to go to our sister site and make a call within earshot of the coronary care unit, I'd get punched for using one because it *visibly and demonstrably* fucks up the readings and traces which are used for live, safety-critical monitoring.

Sure, there are areas of hospitals where it won't affect anything, but there are areas where it will, and it's safer and easier to ban the use over a wider area rather than trying to enforce a policy of allowing it in one room but not the one next to it.
Banning mobile phones in certain areas is just common sense - it's all about whether you can prove, beyond all doubt, that it *doesn't* interfere. If there's any doubt, or you just can't prove it, don't do it.

Re:bollocks

[Ihlosi]

I'm sitting here next to a commercial ECG telemetry system. By taking a call with my cell phone and walking around near the telemetry transmitters, I can *see* the interference on the monitor screen. I can also *see* the interference as I walk near clinical trials subjects with holter ECG recorders on.

Yep. I'm actually developing patient monitoring devices, and have my cellphone next to the ECG I'm working on gives me a nice 1-second warning on the screen of the patient monitor before the thing is actually going to ring.

It's nothing compared to other things we have to deal with (electrosurgery, for example), but then again, doctors _know_ that they can expect the ECG to be distorted when they push the button on the ESU probe.

Re:Metal objects ?

[surprise_audit]

Make sure your pants don't have metal zippers either...

Hey, there's an idea for a stupid lawsuit - sue to make pants manufacturers include a warning label on metal-zippered pants: "In case of thunderstorms, drop pants and hurl them away from you"

Insignificant but spectacular risks

[mrogers]

Great, another headline about a statistically insignificant but spectacular risk. How long before we launch the War On Thunder?

This whole story is based on a letter (not a peer-reviewed article) describing essentially anecdotal evidence that using a mobile phone increases your risk of injury given that you have been struck by lightning. The letter does not say that using a mobile phone increases your (negligible) chances of being struck by lightning.

This story says a lot about the inability of people (including doctors, it would seem) to evaluate risks. I'm surprised the British Medical Journal decided to publish the letter.

Re:Metal objects ?

[Doctor Memory]

So I have a Cell Phone of +1 Lightning Damage?

Back off, bitch!

Re:Metal objects ?

[smellsofbikes]

I've been hiking in subalpine areas a number of times when I've been warned about incipient electrical activity because the zipper on my pants has started buzzing. REAL hikers apparently keep some aluminum foil on top of their backpacks so they can hear it well before zippers start arcing.
(head downhill, fast, get your pack off your back, and if/when you stop huddle down and keep your feet together, since even a close strike will have enough voltage drop across the ground to go up one leg and down the other if you're standing straddling something.)