ELF Knocks Down AM Towers To Save Earth, Intercoms

ScentCone writes "The ELF (Earth Liberation Front) has claimed responsibility for destroying the primary AM towers used by radio station KRKO in Washington state. From their statement: 'AM radio waves cause adverse health effects including a higher rate of cancer, harm to wildlife, and that the signals have been interfering with home phone and intercom lines.' The poor intercom performance must have been the last straw."

Comments

Citation Needed

[slifox]

AM radio causes cancer?

I'm from Jamaica, the show-me island. So show me you're blowing it out your fanny!
(obligatory Futurama reference)

I wonder if any of these ELF people understand physics... Radio behaves according to the inverse square law; in effect, your cellphone exposes you to much more power than all the cell towers around you, simply due to it being much closer. Similarly, any local transmitter you have (e.g. microwave ovens, CRTs, wifi APs, high-speed digital circuitry, etc) will expose you to more power than those far-away broadcast towers. Unless the AM radio tower is in your backyard, you are probably not in tremendous danger...

...well maybe your home intercom *is* in danger... won't someone please think of the intercoms?!?

Re:Citation Needed

[slifox]

Not to mention that at 1700KHz (the upper end of AM medium wave radio), the ideal quarter-wavelength antenna is around 144 feet long.

Ignoring the fact that we aren't very good conductors... at 5-6 feet tall, I doubt the human body can effectively absorb a lot of this relatively very-long-wavelength radiation.

Does anyone have actual data or methods to predict this kind of effect on human bodies?

Re:Citation Needed

[anotheregomaniac]

General information can be found in this FAQ: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/rf-faqs.html and in particular in FCC bulletin 56 page 15: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/bulletins/#56

The maximum permissible exposure to the general public from a radiator must be lower than the prescribed limits outside of the fence line. Lower frequencies, like AM radio, have a much higher permissible power than the frequencies used in cell phones or WiFi because the biological effect is less.

They fact that they mention interference to intercoms would lead one to think one of those involved may live nearby or near another antenna.

Re:Citation Needed

[Mr. Slippery]

there's a reason EM radiation of longer wavelengths is called "non-ionizing". Hint: it's because it's incapable of ionizing anything.

The fact that radiation is not ionizing anything does not imply that it has no effect on living tissue. It could induce microcurrents in some tissues, or cause certain molecules to resonate in a way which affected important chemical reactions.

Which is not to say that AM radio does have any effect, only that "it's not ionizing!" is not a refutation.

Biological systems are complex; if something as relatively simple as a computer can be effected by EM radiation, it's not completely batty to speculate that biological systems might be also. There are a few studies -- such as this one -- that have suggested effects on cerebral blood flow or on sleep patterns, but the data remains spotty at best.

I repeat, I'm not claiming that such effects exist, nor am I defending this vandalism. (Calling it "terrorism" is, of course, ridiculous.) But claiming that EM radiation can't have any health effects because it's not ionizing is bad science.

Re:Stop this now.

[bendodge]

In 2006 PETA found new homes for a grand total of 12 animals on a $31m budget. The rest were killed.
Source: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=288&issue=021