Slashdot Mirror
Killer Apartment Vs. Persistent Microwave Exposure?
An anonymous reader writes "I am considering buying a penthouse apartment in Manhattan that happens to be about twenty feet away from a pair of panel antennas belonging to a major cellular carrier. The antennas are on roughly the same plane as the apartment and point in its direction. I have sifted through a lot of information online about cell towers, most of which suggest that the radiation they emit is low-level and benign. Most of this information, however, seems to concern ground-level exposure at non-regular intervals. My question to Slashdot is: should the prospect of persistent exposure to microwave radiation from this pair of antennas sitting twenty feet from where I rest my head worry me? Am I just being a jackass? Can I, perhaps, line the walls of the place with a tight metal mesh and thereby deflect the radiation? My background is in computer engineering — I am not particularly knowledgeable about the physics of devices such as these. Please help me make an enlightened decision."
Dont buy it. You will worry yourself sick whatever we say.
If exposure to mobile carrier antenna radio waves was of any danger to public health, there is no way you would be seeing these antennas anywhere near apartment complexes, the FCC or whatever is the appropriate authority is in your country would be all over this. On the contrary, you should be happy that your apartment is going to get some pretty damn good coverage :)
Tin foil suit.
Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
If it's a simple dipole antenna and its long axis is aimed at you, there should be minimal exposure. The power emission profile looks kind of like a doughnut with the long part of the antenna at the middle.
If you're that close, you should be able to put a small coil of wire in your apartment and induce a nice free electric current. It won't make you popular with the owners of the antenna but what do they know? Otherwise no, I don't see a problem with RF.
Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
...for your problem.
Right here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1pv16G-liw
I wouldn't risk living there.
As far as I know (and I'm no expert, just good at googling) , the radiation levels from antennas are relatively safe about 3-5 meters away from them but depending on the type of antenna their beam can kind of focused in one direction so that 3-5 meters estimation could mean a measurement ouside the beam direction and if the apartment is inside the beam the radiation could be above safe levels. For example, I've heard that in my country, if you live on the last floor of a building and an antenna is above, the antenna must be on a pole at least 2-2.5 meters high so that distance between the apartments below and the emitter is around 3 meters.
Cellphone antennas would not be uni-directional so there shouldn't be any focused beam or whatever it's called but who knows what other antennas will be installed in the future on the same pole.
So from a radiation point of view you may be safe, but you never know how sensitive you are or how sensitive your family / children etc will be.
Second, while you may not care so much, the property will be harder to sell in the future because of that antenna.
1) Buy it. ...
2) Sue phone company
3)
4) profit!!!!!!!
At the bottom of the
The FCC enforces on a case-by-case basis. Unless someone has turned this situation (this SPECIFIC apartment being this close to a transmitting antenna) to the FCC, then chances are that they have no idea the situation even exists. As for my $0.02, you don't want to spend any more time than you have to being 20 feet from a transmitting antenna, LET ALONE living next to one.
But RF is mostly LoS (Line of Sight), anything blocking is reflected, absorbed or transmissive.
If you have solid walls (eg concrete), I wouldn't worry about it. Glass, you should be okay. But if it's like wood or plaster, the particles in these materials don't really block anything, so it's mostly transmissive. That's why you may get great reception in a wood frame house, but not in it's basement.
Basic analogy:
If you put a translucent material in front of a lightbulb, you can see the lightbulb, but if you put metal foil, you can see around the foil. Therefor you reduce, but not eliminate your exposure.
If you are seriously worried, grab a CFL tube or a large fluorescent light and hold it outside and inside the building. If it actually glows outside the building, I'd be wary. If it glows inside the building, don't buy it.
This is Manhattan, not Kansas. You'll be fine. The power of the antenna in this case is restricted by the larger number of cell phone users in the city. Because of the population, the antennas fill up their bandwidth in a much smaller area. The antenna may only have enough power to cover the city block before it fills up. If it was powerful enough to cover more area than it can serve with cell coverage, there would be interference with other antennas trying to cover those edge areas.
There is a product called Scotch-Tint that is a EMF reducer for windows. Combine that with some metallic fabrics on the walls on that side. www.lessemf.com is one of many suppliers for those products. I've used a conductive plastic from those folks to make a shielded rack for some RF sensitive equipment.
The FCC may have something to say about that though. If he is close enough, his mesh may block enough of the signal to put the antenna out of use.
I am not sure if you were meaning microwave in the strict sense, as a microwave ant pointed at your building would be dumb. Microwave transmissions are very directional. GSM or CDMA are going to be much lower, and mostly benign. You probably have attended a church or worked in a building that has them. You're around them all the time. Also, cellular systems are cellular. Meaning, their transmit power is relatively small so that the frequency can be reused across the same town for obvious freq management reasons.
Even if you get some information from /. and you buy it, you will need to explain that it's safe to every visitor who notices these antennas.
The facts about urban wireless towers is that they're very low power because of the high population density. They use very small cells in urban towers to achieve a very small coverage radius so that they can put up more towers in the city and reuse the same spectrum. Furthermore, just being in-doors cuts the power level 10-fold and I'd really doubt that you're getting more than -40 dBm which is equivalent to 100 nanowatts of power even if you're outside the windows. My Wi-Fi Access Point is 5 feet from me and it's got a power level of -13 dBm which is about 1000 times stronger than a -40 dBm signal. Now if you think that's high, your cell phone probably has a signal strength of +10 dBm which means the power density is 100,000 times stronger than a -40 dBm signal. And if you think the phone is dangerous, check out this article from me http://www.digitalsociety.org/2009/09/sar-ratings-are-not-a-measure-of-radiation/ and this article http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/01/cell-phone-exposure-prevents-or-reverses-alzheimer-in-mice/. So really, worrying about that cellular tower is just silly. If you're really worried about it, buy one of those $100 "Electrosmog" meters and measure the signal strength yourself at various places.
Mobile company raised cell tower next to some village. Locals complained about health problems caused by this tower. When contacted cell company CEO replied:
- That's nothing. Wait and see what happens when we turn it on.
Ask the landlord to relocate the cell-phone towers.
This strategy is quite effective in dealing with obstinate landlords. I should know since I'm serving time for 1 count of voluntary manslaughter.
Killer apartment vs. KILLER apartment
o hai
In 2004 the Dutch laboratory TNO investigated the influence of UMTS and GSM radiation on two groups of people, one with health complaints they ascribed to GSM base stations and one without. The tests were double blind. For both groups a small, but statistically significant relationship was found between exposure to "UMTS-like" radiation and the sense of wellbeing reported by the subjects. This result was a disappointment to the Dutch government, that had commissioned this investigation. They had subsequent research done by a Swiss institution which did not confirm the findings. Anayway, the city of Hoofddorp, where I live, forbids the placement of cellular base station antennas on top of residential buildings. I support this policy; better safe than sorry.
Every time you do you are holding the antenna of that right next to your head. Yes it's lower power, but there's an inverse square distance law at work to, so the intensity is massively greater than that from the one 20 feet away. So either buy the apartment, or stop using cell phones. They are the only two logical choices.
Are there any laws against passive shielding inside your flat? After all, you could simply put standard metal office furniture inside your flat, and that would cause massive interference, too. I'd say, if the phone company doesn't want the signal to be blocked by whatever is inside a flat, it should put the tower somewhere where it won't be blocked by something inside a flat.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
The signal power will reduce by the cube of distance from the masts
Square of the distance, actually.
There's been a lot of propaganda on both sides of this issue, and a lot of reasons to be skeptical. Since the jury's still out on the dangers of cell tower radiation, the big questions here would seem to be: 1) Do you feel like being a guinea pig? 2) If you do something like making your apartment into a Faraday cage, are you opening up a different can of worms, such as, can the cell carrier take action against you? Probably not, but for a purchase as major as this, you'd probably want to check with a lawyer... 3) How much time and expense do you put into something like this?
The intensity of the radiation varies inversely with the square of the distance, not the cube of the distance.
You no buy.
First, just the shred of doubt will have some effect on your well being. Not just through stress, but through placebo effects.
Second, this is a relatively new risk of exposure for the species and investigations into it are relatively weak. Seems like a good time to deploy the Precautionary Principle.
Buy an apt exposed to trees or a view, instead.
Damn those pesky terrorists
I work with high power RF for a living. There are a lot of variables that contribute to non-ionizing radiation. Proximity, transmitter power, antenna radiation pattern, materials between you and the antenna, etc. There are ways to estimate the field intensity, but unless you know all the necessary factors, your calculations could be off by orders of magnitude. Having said that, the poster who commented that urban cells are lower power is generally correct, however, in a major metropolitan area, the cell can have many channels active at once, and the effect is cumulative. ANSI C95.2 is the safety standard covering this radiation. It's pretty technical, but the gist is the licensee (in this case the carrier) is responsible for making sure they don't cook the public.
The carrier must certify to the FCC that there are no publicly accessible areas that receive unsafe RF fields. The exact number varies by frequency, but generally there are two levels specified, one for publicly accessible areas and another for areas where personnel who have been trained in RF can work in levels above the public ones. These areas are normally calculated by the carrier prior to installation and they won't install if there's any chance they might exceed the safe levels.
As an example, I did an RF survey at one location where there was a multiple-transmitter FM antenna installed on top of a building that was across the street from another taller building. We had three FM broadcast transmitters operating on this antenna with about 250 kilowatts of radiated power, and the measured levels in the building across the street were not over the limits for public access. This was about 150 feet horizontally from the antenna. The solar coating on the building's glass stopped enough RF that it wasn't a problem.
If you want to measure it yourself, there are some inexpensive meters that are pretty accurate that will give you an indication of how much RF you're seeing. The one I have is this one: http://www.trifield.com/TrifieldMeter.htm It's about $150. I've seen these for sale at Fry's.
I have calibrated mine against a $5000 Narda commercial RF radiation meter and it's pretty close, certainly close enough for a "go/no-go" test which is what I use it for.
----- Leghorn "Not responsible for program content"
When / if you make an offer, make sure that it includes an allowance for modification of the structure to make it "radiation safe". Take the allowance and pocket it, thereby saving you a bunch of money on the upfront side.
Be prepared for the next purchaser to use this same pretext when you sell, and price accordingly.
Even better: once you own the property, create a B.S. LLC and use it to certify the property as "radiation safe" Then provide the certificate, the "radiation data", and the receipt for the radiation exposure study, when you go to sell the property. Then you get the best price coming and going...
-=Geoskd
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
One person said "The power of the antenna in this case is restricted by the larger number of cell phone users in the city." And, it is true that the radiation intensity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source. I personally think that you should attempt to measure the radiation from the tower. Then, you could decide if you needed to turn the apartment into a Farraday cage.
. . . and send a message to /. with the subject, "DING! DING! DING!", just before you are "done."
So we will all know that it is dinner time, and we can come over to eat you.
I got dibs on the braaaaiiiiinnn.
On the serious side, ask the seller If you can put a couple of lab rats in a cage for a month in the apartment, before you settle. If they end up looking like Kentucky Fried Rats, pass on the apartment.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
And then fail utterly to find a controlled study that shows repeatable results.
Lets make this clear, in over fifty years of trying nobody and I repeat nobody has yet managed to do a REPEATABLE study that shows harmful effects of low level non-ionizing radiation.
The key factor here is REPEATABLE. If it cannot be repeated it is just a meaningless statistical fluke.
Normally I wouldn't worry at all.
But the fact that,
1) It's only 20 feet away,
2) It's in the same plane as you, and,
3) It's pointed AT you...
That worries me some more. Obviously you want to talk to someone who really knows this stuff, and can also measure the EM radiation in your future apt.
I also assume its a 'killer' apt because its in a great location and its CHEAP. And of course, its CHEAP because everyone is scared of the antenna pointing right at it...
You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
Ok, there's alot of sentiment that EM radiation has no effect on DNA, etc etc. But I had read somewhere that people that live near power lines out in the country seem to develop extremely rare forms of cancer at a higher percentage than people living in the city. Of course, coincidence is not causation.
With that in mind, do I exclusively use a cell phone? Yes. I just don't know if I'd want to live next to a tower that might focus EM radiation right at my room while I sleep 8 hours a day.
If you can afford a penthouse apartment in Manhattan, you're making an awful lot of money for a computer engineer. Where can the rest of us get jobs like yours?
If your microwave popcorn starts to pop before you turn the microwave on, it's probably not safe.
Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
Regardless of its effects on your health, EM radiation can heat up deep under your skin. I wouldn't buy that apartment, as I'd then be anticipating continuous uncomfortable heat.
You are probably right, because it would need a conspiracy to hide research results. But... remember the tobacco companies' bought research.
A while ago, I learned a new expression which I've never seen in my native Swedish media -- which do say something about at least Sweden's political trustworthiness:
Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
Probably.
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
Why not do this scientifically? Get/procure/rent/borrow a field-strength meter, or hire someone to measure it for you. It's cheap relative to the price you're looking at for a top-floor place in Manhattan.
Then, measure it. Walk all around, sometimes internal reflections can make a further-away side 'hotter' than a closer one.
Then measure your cell phone, right up close a cm or two from the front, as if you were holding it.
The readings will probably be in decibels (dB). Calculate (db of tower) - (db of cellphone). The difference is how much stronger the tower is compared to the cellphone. It goes in powers of 10. 0 dB is equal power. 10 dB is 10x the power. 20 dB is 100x the power. 30 dB is 1000x the power. And so on. If it is negative, it is weaker, by similar power-of-10 ratios.
Then make a decision depending on what you find. Same or less power than a cellphone, you're OK. 10x the power is probably still OK but you'll have to decide depending how you feel about it all. 100x the power, maybe reconsider.
the furniture would be small enough for the RF to go around, but a faraday cage the size of a apartment would be a bit too large at 20 feet
Don't buy, If your having doubts, anyone who you try and sell it to may have the same thoughts and avoid it.
If this is reflected in the price all well and good, but all you need is a really Juicy Scare story when you put it on the market to really sour the deal.
Square of the distance assumes a point source.
I think in this case the signal won't be dropping off nearly that fast.
Steve
http://electromagnetichealth.org/quotes-from-experts/
Also, worth carefully reading the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health
From the Wikipedia article:
Sleep, EEG and waking rCBF have been studied in relation to RF exposure for a decade now, and the majority of papers published to date have found some form of effect.
So there is SOME kind of an effect, and we don't understand it yet. Those that scoff at any biological effect at all are fools. Wise men don't scoff, they watch carefully and reserve final judgment. Take a close look at quantum physics if you don't think we live in a mysterious universe...
Since there IS some kind of biological effect, and it is not well understood, I would err on the side of caution. I would most especially not want to chance affecting the DNA of a women's eggs (which already exist her whole life) and/or conceiving children in that environment. Maybe the chance of problems is low because the signal "should" be low inside the building, but why take the chance when experts are disagreeing and the trend is toward more caution? (cue the inevitable joke about a real woman there... sigh...)
An Italian court has linked cell radiation to cancer, for the first time in history. I don't have the link in English, but it will probably be discussed online soon. So, no, I wouldn't buy the apartment, unless I wanted to sue for damages later in life.
Ever see that perforated metal sheet in the window of your microwave oven? It stops the microwaves from escaping, because their wavelength is larger than the hole diameter.
So, buy the apartment, and put up a similar metal sheeting against the walls and windows facing the microwave tower.
If you do it right, it'll actually affect the antennas to the point it will set off some alarms on the systems monitoring the antennas.
Hopefully you don't subscribe to a cellular service utilizing that tower, or don't expect service to continue in your new apartment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage/
- jw
- ------ Go 'til ya know.
first make sure you can measure the level of radiation to an acceptable accuracy.
then, line one or more of your walls with conducting material to shield the radiation.
use measurements to determine if there are still hot spots in the most important areas of your home, and add shielding until they are all gone.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
The point of source is just a larger area (or somewhere behind the antenna for the math)
And if the results were unfavorable, what then?
Here's a recent article on the hazards of transient electromagnetic fields, such as those created by compact fluorescent light bulbs:
While I'm posting, here's a neat little website that plots FCC-registered antennas on a google map:
http://www.antennasearch.com/default.asp
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
"Killer Apartment Vs. Persistent Microwave Exposure"?
If the 'persistent microwave exposure' turns out a bad thing, the place may indeed be a 'killer apartment'... ;-)
Re re-saleability - even if you plan to stay there in the long term, you should still make your offer reflect the antennae... ...after all, your current vendor already faces a lower sellability on the place because of the antennae. Bid lower and leave it to the vendor to decide whether and how much more time to invest to try and line up another buyer...
It might have been the cops that gave you headaches, not the tower.
Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.
Science report wise it seems to be a bit of a tossup between "totally safe" and "guarantee of cancer and death" so I don't think you'll find great comfort in reading any of it, unless you think one report is better then the others.
It might be harmless and safe for "normal" exposure, whatever that is. But concidering you are going to live there, spending "lots" of time there everyday for possibly years and years to come. I think I'd pass if I was in the situation, don't think the killer appartment will be worth the potential hassle and constant thinking about the risks it would bring.
I guess if you are inclined and really want the place you could turn the entire apartment into a giant Faraday Cage totally shielding it from any type of radiation. Naturally this will probably also totally kill your cellphone reception, wifi connections and whatnot, unless you put in booster antennas for that, which sort of defeats its purpose.
Will the giant forest of antennas bring down the price? It might be worth buying then and starting to campaing against having the antennas moved, become one of those people that go down to City Hall and protest once a week and send in letters all the time.
Possibly there might be some kinda device you could aquire that will knockout the antennas, this will or might possibly be illegal, that you can turn on and off as you see fit. Eventually they might get tired of the interruptions to service and move them.
Wait a minute, you can afford a penthouse apt in manhattan, but you are unsure about the safety of living next to a cellular antenna array that (to use your words) is pointed right at your apartment, so you turn to Slashdot? I don't believe it.
I also don't believe that any company would install a cellular antenna array and point it at a structure - it would seriously impact the coverage area of the antenna, and they could probably just as easily installed the antenna on a taller building and avoid interference...
Ken
While I can't comment on the radiation issues (a touchy subject with lots and lots of seemingly conflicting findings by not necessarily independent researchers), some of those towers do generate a very annoying sound.
A friend of mine lives in close proximity of one of those beasts, and the high pitched humming makes me uncomfortable. Wouldn't want to live there myself.
Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
If exposure to mobile carrier antenna radio waves was of any danger to public health, there is no way you would be seeing these antennas anywhere near apartment complexes, the FCC or whatever is the appropriate authority is in your country would be all over this. On the contrary, you should be happy that your apartment is going to get some pretty damn good coverage :)
You have waaaaaayyyy too much trust in Government; their competence, their inability to be swayed by industry, and that they're human too.
Case: Tuna. The Tuna industry made sure that the FDA said that appropriate levels of mercury in food were above what is in Tuna - even though in reality, Tune has too much mercury in it. You will find no reference to this because everyone at the FDA who was party to it is too afraid to say anything for fear of losing their jobs.
When it comes to toxicity, always go to outside sources. Then you run into the problem with organizations with their own agendas.
It really sucks being a consumer.
Why in the world would you take a chance like this?
so if it were five feet away (on your windowsill), i'd perhaps do a doubletake. but 20 feet away, and the power you are actually getting is much lower than first impression dictates
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I guess it depends on whether the photons have enough kinetic energy to knock a nucleotide out of a DNA molecule. If they don't, you're safe, if they do, you would have to multiply the number of times a nucleotide gets knocked out, with the chance of developing cancer from that event (pretty small chance actually, it might even be that a base pair needs to be knocked out to create a mutation, not just one nucleotide, I wonder if anyone did any research on that). Other than that the only thing that could happen is excitement of your molecules, making your body temperature rise, but I would guess the power you absorb over the volume of your body would be insignificant compared to other influences.
Okay, it's funny too. But it's also true, I just can't find the reference.
Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
..and you'll be fine.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Go find an apartment that have a poor cell phone coverage.
Then to improve the situation, you buy a femtocell or your neighbor buy one and install next to the wall closest to your bed.
Legislation define maximum exposure allowed.
The distance from an antena is not the main factor; you also have to factor the power of the antenna.
In a city with lots of people to connect, you will have lots of low power antenna. While in the suburb, you will have more powerful antenna. The exposition of a nice house surrounded by trees from an antena a block away may be higher than in your apartment.
The fact that you can see the antena just show that you don't have a nice view. Next apartment you visit, the view may be better, the antena may be fixed on your building around the corner of your windows.
Wasn't there a recent article here on /. detailing paint that stopped radio waves? I'd look into that.
I'd also drop the FCC a line about regulations regarding placement of dishes. I don't think they allow situations like that.
Anyway the paint will stop WiFi so you won't be able to jack anyone elses and visa versa. Probably not good for getting FM or T.V. reception, but then if you can afford an apt. like that you likely get cable.
On the other hand, if you're a New Yorker, you've chosen a life that is going to kill you far too young from environment/social/stress issues anyway. Best to chuck it all and find your own private Idaho and some nice MLM that will let you vacation as you work, get proper nutrition and retire in a few years with a wad o cash. If you've made it to Manhattan living under your own power, this should be childs play for you.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
...Faraday cage.
Actually getting accurate data is more useful than arguing about what somebodys paper said.
Fixed that for ya.
Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
Right. I wasn't clear on the point I was making.
If the apartment had a point source 20' away, moving an additional 20' to the other side of the apartment would decrease intensity 4x.
Instead, take the situation as an equivalent point source 100' away--the intensity drops off much more slowly, about 2x decrease.
Steve
Your first hint should be that the apartment is for sale because everyone in it died of leukemia...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
One other factor is causation. The fact is that on this subject there are some studies that seem to show correlation, drowned out by ones which don't. But so far, there is no known method for this radiation to affect living tissues. Maybe if anyone could get anywhere describing a mechanism for causation, then serious scientists would take another look at the extremely weak correlation.
In Communications Security (COMSEC, for short), they follow what are called TEMPEST guidelines to prevent unwanted signals from getting out or in.
While you can Google TEMPEST COMSEC and get lots of hits, here are some useful suggestions you can implement:
1. Use copper mesh on the walls. It doesn't have to be embedded in the walls if you use decorative screens or floor to ceiling drapes (presumably behind nice curtains, unless you are into the Metallic/Techno decorating thing). 2. Likewise, for windows, a stainless steel or copper screen will do a great job and not look hideous. 3. You may want to put up a decorative wall panel (trifold) between your computer stuff and windows and have some copper mesh embedded/applied to it.
As regards the building itself, if there is brick or stone on the facade facing the towers, you shouldn't have to worry about dealing with walls. Using options 2 or 3 should suffice for windows and doors.
Since you are getting a penthouse suite, you should have money to do this and might want to call in a business/computer security expert with TEMPEST experience. Not cheap, but will make sure no industrial espionage or stray radiation will get into your domicile.
By the way, my Father used to work in a high-rise building for the Federal government just next to a high-powered radio station tower near D.C. and they stated that as long as he kept the sliding glass door out onto the patio covered, he was safe. Of course, radio reception was lousy for anything other than that station, and cell phones and wireless networking was not around then. Being the Federal government (back in the 70's), they did come around and ask if he wanted patio furniture for the deck (facing the radio tower)! He wisely and graciously declined citing the potential health hazard (and not mentioning that it was a waste of money).
Supreme Granter of Doctor of Obviology Letters ("A FIRM Command of the Obvious")
The basic physics say you're more than okay.
The sunlight streaming in thru your windows is:
(1) At least 100 times stronger, in incident watts.
(2) Has a million times more punch per photon.
(3) Couples to your body at least 10 times more. ... so as a rough estimate, the cell phone signals affect your body about a billion times less than standing in the sunlight.
(Actually, much less than that, as photons below infrared cannot, no way, dislodge any electrons, so there cannot be any chemical changes
in your body as a result. )
Did you ever consider that maybe the headaches could have been caused by the noxious fumes from all the police cars?
Police radios are like 100 watts, intermittent.
I lived for 15 years in the shadow of a 50,000-watt radio station tower. On 24/7. No headaches.
If you can afford such an apartment and this is that important to you, what the heck are you doing searching the web for free info and asking Slashdot for free info?
I am 100% certain that there are qualified and competent folks out there who can provide you with accurate information, for a fee.
SARAVA!
Unless you are intercepting the entire beam of a directional antenna (only likely if this is an antenna communicating with another mast or base station, rather than the more likely scenario of one designed to talk to handsets) then inverse square is the correct formula, surely.
The FCC may have something to say about that though. If he is close enough, his mesh may block enough of the signal to put the antenna out of use.
Any passive blocking that he puts on the walls or windows as an owner is something that he can't he held liable for(as opposed to active blocking or putting up a billboard or similar). I'd love to see the judge's face when the cell phone company tries to explain how their antenna requires his apartment to be non-shielded to operate properly(ie - we need to beam the signal *through* it because we put it in a bad location). They are supposed to be placed in such a manner that they are clear of buildings and physical obstructions. Hence the reason they are almost always on a small tower above a roof top. One thing, though - if you shield your place from these frequencies, you won't be able to use your cell phone at all while at home. You *can* turn your house into a giant Faraday cage. But expect it to act like one as well. You likely also won't be able to use your radio or HDTV over the air. Nothing comes in means nothing gets out as well. (OTOH, Wi-fi in home would be secure - heh)
Also, the refit won't be cheap. That Scotchtint runs about $1000 for a 60"x100ft roll. EMI resistant mesh for the walls generally runs the same. Generally you have to re-plaster or put another thin layer of drywall over top of it, which is factored into that price. And of course, it has to be installed properly. At that range(feet vs hundreds of feet) it will generate a significant amount of current.
Possible? Of course. But in today's world, being without tv, radio, wireless, and so on in such a place in NYC would be horrendous. In fact, trying to sell a place that you purposely turned into that would probably make it just as hard to resell as if you did nothing at all. I'd just keep looking. Maybe there's a similar place a block or two over?
I'm sorry but a tin-foil hat is not going to cut it. You need an Armadillo hat. You have seen how a transformer is made from plates? Well same with an Armadillo hat - you need the overlapping plates to prevent the formation of Eddy Currents.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Gentlemen, can't we compromise? The signal power will reduce by the 2.5 power of the distance. Getting along isn't so difficult, after all!
I love how he had to note he was "getting the penthouse".
I don't think you need to worry about the antennas as much as the butler cause the butler is always the one that did it!
If there isn’t a window on that side where the panels are, just get some wallpaper that filters them. You know: Tinfoil hat style. (Well, usually some kind of wireframe suffices, if it’s e.g. 1/3 smaller than the waves.)
But if you want to know EXACTLY, you can always find out the energy (=frequency) of the radiation, and compare it against the bonding energy of e.g. proteins in your body (keyword Van-der-Waals bond) and others. But be aware that the quantum physics of this is often counterintuitive.
Then you don’t have to rely on biased tests or people telling you their bias, but know it yourself.
From what I remember, microwaves can only create 0.1-0.2 degrees Celsius of heating in the body. So less than (the infrared in) sunlight, but deeper penetrating.
Or in simple terms: If you fear microwaves, you should have more fear of sunlight, as it’s much stronger. :)
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
It's a buyer's market for luxury property in Manhattan right now. Express your concerns to the sellers and hint that you'll need to have a survey team out to test for EMF exposure before you'd consider buying. Build an image in their minds of 3-4 guys in Tyvek jumpsuits walking around with meters on the roof and in the halls and knocking on your future neighbor's doors. (There's no reason for them to wear Tyvek jumpsuits, but you get the idea.) They'll likely offer to drop the price in exchange for you not doing that. More than enough to cover the cost of shielding and chemotherapy.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Assuming a 1kW transmitter, uniformly distributed over a one half sphere (because it makes no sense to send signals straight up), you 70kg standing an hour at 20ft from the transmitter, you'd heat up 0.06 degrees Celsius or almost a tenth of a Fahrenheit. Seems benign.
wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(1000W*((1m^2)/(2*Pi*(20ft)^2)))*3600s/(70kg*4186J/(kg*K))
And, on the other side, 50 years of trying and nobody can show it is safe, either - rates of cancer acquisition aren't exactly falling in the "modern world."
sorry, you're right. i fail at physics
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The problem is people can't tell the difference between low level and high level and they overreact. It's like the power line thing - you get some on one side insisting quite stupidly that if it's not over the horizon it's dangerous and a stupid knee jerk reaction on the other side insisting that it can never happen and induction furnaces could never melt steel (inductive heating is the mechanism that causes problems, the same thing that melts the steel only warming the body this time).
The reality is if you are not close enough that you are worried about reaching out and getting electrocuted then nobody can measure a temperature rise inside your body. So we've had pregnant women working next to poorly sheilded high voltage machinery giving birth to babies with defects and nothing else so far in about half a century.
One thing that should concern you is that the exact response of the human body to these signals is still not understood. Can you trust ANY study when these studies are intended to prove or disprove something in the first place, in regards to the health impact of being near a cell phone tower for an extended period of time? Also, think about all of the things that have been discovered to be harmful after decades of use, and then look at cell phones. You may remember DDT, Saccharin, and other things that have caused so many health problems.
So, don't go for it, just because you can't know for sure if there would be a health concern due to prolonged exposure.
in manhattan. Take a different one. Yes it likely has no effect at all (actually what frequency are they, you could put a lot of material that absorbs it to heat your apartment in winter, I kid, I kid) but you are considering it and so will potential buyers down the line when the second leg down in this recession means you can't make the payments anymore.
Also, if you are buying it it isn't an apartment it's a condo (heck it's NYC could be a co-op even), right?
Best... cell... reception... EVER!
It's definitely safe. This problem was put to bed back in the 80s:
"Radiation, yes indeed! You hear the most outrageous lies about it. Half-baked, goggle-boxed do-gooders telling everybody it's bad for you. Pernicious nonsense! Everybody could stand 100 chest x-rays a year. They ought to have 'em too."
- J. Frank Parnell in "Repo Man"
There, now that that's solved...
---- It won't be as bad as you fear or as good as you hope, but it will take twice as long as you plan.
Companies can do RF testing. Just like you have a home inspection, you could add RF testing to the clause and make them pay for it and allow any even questionable levels to allow you to walk. This would also provide clear documentation for future sale.
Think about the coverage, not a single dropped call in that apartment.
tv - cable/FIOS radio - internet radio? wireless - get google voice and link your cell and landline.
Also, recall that the power density drops by the square of the distance from the antenna. So, if you measure the power at one micron away from the antenna, it will be twice the strength you'd get if you measure it two microns away. Extend this out, and at 3 microns, you're down to 1/8th the power, 4 microns = 1/16th. At 20 feet, you should be all the way down to 1 / 3,716,121,600,000th the original power, or about one three-trillionth the original power. Right? So nothing to worry about.
First of all, the radiation from these towers is often strong enough to vibrate your brain waves making you imagine that you are hearing it. Interestingly the subject always hears the sounds as if they are right behind their head. The army has investigated using this technology to confuse enemy troops by inducing the sound of voices behind their enemy's heads.
Here's are some more scientific publications to "ease your mind" on the subject:
Magnetic-Field: Induced DNA Strand Breaks in Brain Cells of the Rat
Author(s): Henry Lai and Narendra P. Singh
Source: Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 112, No. 6 (May, 2004), pp. 687-694
Published by: Brogan & Partners
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3435995
Nerve Cell Damage in Mammalian Brain after Exposure to Microwaves from GSM Mobile
Phones
Author(s): Leif G. Salford, Arne E. Brun, Jacob L. Eberhardt, Lars Malmgren, Bertil R. R.
Persson
Source: Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 111, No. 7 (Jun., 2003), pp. 881-883
Published by: Brogan & Partners
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3435159
NEURAL FUNCTION AND BEHAVIOR:
DEFINING THE RELATIONSHIP
Allan H. Frey, Sondra R. Feld, and Barbara Frey
SECTION 6
EVIDENCE FOR GENOTOXIC EFFECTS
(RFR AND ELF Genotoxicity)
Henry Lai, PhD
Department of Bioengineering
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington
USA
So.... NYC cell providers point their panels at apartment buildings... I guess that explains why AT&T's service in Manhattan is so poor these days.
chown -R us
The FCC enforces on a case-by-case basis. Unless someone has turned this situation (this SPECIFIC apartment being this close to a transmitting antenna) to the FCC, then chances are that they have no idea the situation even exists.
Most urabn cell phone towers have a 20W average power (100W in rural areas), since they want a large coverage area the gain will only be 3dB (parabolic dish 25 dB gain) at 6 meters with a 100W power source and 25dB of gain the power density is 6.7718 mW/cm2 using typical numbers 20W 3dB 6 meters the power density is 0.0086 mW/cm2 the "safe exposure level" for 2.4 GHz as defined by national association for amerature radio is 30 mW/cm2 for uncontrolled and 100 mW/cm2 for controlled. A cell phone with 3W 2.2dB of gain (diapole) at 1 inch would have a power density of 61.4108 mW/cm2.
Knowledge = Power
P= W/t
t=Money
Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
Obviously, you're concerned.
Measure how much RF is blasting through there. A field strength meter or possibly a spectrum analyzer will be very helpful with this pursuit.
Don't trust the MPE guidelines (if you did, you need to base it off the "uncontrolled exposure" side, only far more conservative), because they want you to die a gruesome painful death.
Measure first, build your Farraday cage, measure again, improve your Farraday cage... ad nauseum.
The FCC may have something to say about that though. If he is close enough, his mesh may block enough of the signal to put the antenna out of use.
Any passive blocking that he puts on the walls or windows as an owner is something that he can't he held liable for(as opposed to active blocking or putting up a billboard or similar). I'd love to see the judge's face when the cell phone company tries to explain how their antenna requires his apartment to be non-shielded to operate properly(ie - we need to beam the signal *through* it because we put it in a bad location).
Good point. Also if it does become useless and they relocate it you probably increased the resale value.
But in today's world, being without tv, radio, wireless, and so on in such a place in NYC would be horrendous.
maybe not if you have cable.
I am a PE and have done hundreds of RF emissions studies on wireless facilities, including rooftop installations like the one you describe. My initial thought is that twenty feet would be an unusually small distance between the antennas and your window. It may very well be much larger then that (50' or more is more likely - and would have much lower emission levels) but seems closer due to the perspective of the surrounding panoramic view. If it were truly only 20', and the building hosted antenna arrays from many wireless carriers (and FM transmitters), then there is a very slight possibility that the levels in your apartment could be near the public exposure limit. This situation is quite unlikely however. Most wireless carriers have an independent RF emissions study performed on rooftop installations that include measurements of the pre-existing antennas, so if you reached the right person and were persuasive enough you might be able to get them to share that with you (very unlikely). Another poster recommended a cheap meter. I'm not convinced of their accuracy, but you could give it a try if it worries you. Someone else mentioned low-E glass and correctly stated that it blocks a significant amount of RF energy. If you have low-e glass then even 20' away would mean your apartment is below the public exposure limit.
--- There are two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don't know it
Chicken wire is too coarse for microwave.
People who build these things use much finer mesh; take a look.
No need for mesh he can replace the drywall with fire rated drywall that has a foil back. Just tape the studs with aluminum tape so there is contunity between the boards and put a transparent mesh on the windows while it won't be perfect the levels would be knocked down.
Knowledge = Power
P= W/t
t=Money
Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
Why are you even considering buying this place? Its an obvious problem.
As well as all the likely serious health hazards such as frequent migraines and increased risk of cancer, it will be a bitch to ever sell again.
It does not make sense that a cell phone tower's panel antenna would be blasting straight into an adjacent apartment as the article poster describes. This is counterproductive to achieving good coverage from that antenna.
The article poster says "roughly" on the same plane, how is "roughly" defined? Those panel antennas can have some pretty significant directionality in the vertical plane, such that even if "roughly" means "one or two stories difference", the antennas are probably shooting OVER this apartment and not INTO it. Especially since, as I said before, it makes no sense for these antennas to be shooting into it.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Um, no. Licensed business users are allowed pretty high power levels too.
Also, there are clearly defined amateur radio bands. If a ham goes outside the bands they are licensed for (easy to figure out who due to amateur radio identification requirements), they're subject to losing their license if it proves to be continuous behavior.
I can't figure out whether you're utterly clueless or a total troll.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Why trust what anyone says and then risk your health only to find out 10~20 years from now that it was in fact hazardous but after it is too late? Best to stray on the side of safety. You can always find another apartment....another body, not so much.
The FCC can't do shit he is not radiating, wire mesh is used for plaster, houses with plaster may not have slats they have a wire mesh also foil backed drywall (fireboard) could be used, all of these things are within code and he could not be forced to remove them.
Knowledge = Power
P= W/t
t=Money
Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
You have no clue. Typical basestation power output is 30-45W average power total. Somewhat higher in rural areas.
In Manhattan, the power is going to be far less than this.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Yes, I know what hams are. Hams regularly interfere with police and fire operations trying to help when it is not needed. Hams use obsolete analog communication on huge swaths of valuable spectrum under the excuse of helping emergency communications when really they oppose it as much as they are able. Hams claim to create technological innovation when in actuality none of them has developed anything useful in several decades. Most hams nowadays purchase their equipment from outlets like any other consumer. Hams are an outmoded obsolete throwback from an earlier era, like eugenics or racism. Ham radio should be abolished and the spectrum put to profit-making use for the public good, instead of the good of a select few. But hams have a powerful political lobby in this country and overseas to protect their interests. Hams have so much money have their own personal satellites in orbit. I hate every last one of you and will strive to the utmost to see your hobby destroyed by any means necessary.
I trust you're never going to use wi-fi? :)
The first clue that something's up is that it's available. Previous tenants doubtlessly died. Or went crazy . . . and died in a hail of gunfire. Or were taken over by the government and sent to do a mission . . . and died at the hands of Iranian intelligence.
The hows and the whats are meaningless . . . if you get that place, you are going to die.
In conclusion, you are exposed to radiation every day -- don't be a pussy.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
just don't buy the bed with the huge parabolic headboard.
as other posters suggest. Make your intellectual decision based on the rad survey results. Make your emotional decision based on the burden of constant, even though possibly irrational, worry. Dismiss any thoughts of effectively shielding your living space. This can only be done at the construction phase, is incredibly expensive, and is compromised every time you open a window or a door. Post-construction measures like RF reflective or absorbent paints will not prevent RF leakage through what might seem like minor discontinuities, but which act as slot antennas to re-radiate RF energy into a room. There are lots of apartments, it's not a good idea (for several reasons) to fall in love with a particular bit of real estate when you're in the buying mode anyway.
Use as much info as you can from the internet and other sources to get documents showing possible threats to health, and that you would be ok to move in but at a discounted rate.
Then once moved in, proceed to start jamming the panel by using such food stuffs as
paints etc....shoot them using balloons(like water balloons).
This will make a coating needing the company to come and clean up the panel, after a few times of this they might get the idea that being so close to a building was not such a good idea, and relocate.
Might also include some other tenants in on it, to make it a sort of game if you will, keep score so that the one with the most hits gets a free bottle of vodka or something.... you would be surprised at how much people will do for free booze.
Also, make sure that no one ever does it from their window, always from the roof. If a camera catches you (or witness) they can point to the window, if they see you from the roof, they can barely make out details. Then if ever approached, just say those pesky teenagers have been at it again.
Seriously, is there no regulation about such things, I know there is for hydro lines being too close to housing, why not cell towers?
Generally accepted scientific information from the FCC suggests that beyond about 5 meters from the antenna, the power levels are sufficiently safe. However a couple of studies in Germany and Israel suggest that the incidence of cancer is increased by 3 to 4 times at distances of several hundred meters. If it were me, I would play it safe and not take that apartment.
I read somewhere that Barrack Obama is a Kenyan. Not very science-y, but I read it somewhere.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
He said panel antenna, so it's actually emitting a focused beam. Intensity could be negligible or almost full power.
But first roll a giant ball of foil and go into the apartment. If it starts to spark, then you probably will need to do what the subject line says.
Foil is cheap: sanity is priceless.
"penthouse apartment in Manhattan".
Rent a nice regular apartment, have some cash left and go to Ikea, still have money left, go to dinner and the theatre, still have money left in the bank. Work to live life and see things and do things, don't work to acquire stuff, especially rented stuff.
The answer you're going to get on here is going to be different between people thinking about the question you asked, and the question you should've asked.
The merits of the theory that the radiation is harmful may be debated, but there's a better reason not to buy it that there really is no debate on:
When you need to sell it, the next buyer will be asking the same question.
It doesn't matter if its safe or not, its going to make it hard to sell it the next time, unless you are enough experienced in the market to know how much its going to drop the value on a resale and ensure you buy at that much below market now.
Its like buying a house near powerlines. It may be perfectly safe, but selling the house later is going to be a pain in the ass.
And wallpaper your apartment with the grids, and the windows too. Just be sure to ground them onto the plumbing, or opening doors might be fun.
..........FULL STOP.
Don't forget the tinfoil hat. That's what they're for after all...
"It's a doughnut stuffed with M&M's. That way when you finish the doughnut, you don't have to eat any M&M's."
I don't know where you're posting from, but you should realize that this story was submitted from a 3D Flatland.
Rules of thumb for four-dee universes do not apply here.
You could read this book and be even more afraid (or maybe this author is just paranoid.)
Two words: cellular internet
Why is this apartment on the market in the first place? Did someone drop dead in the apartment?
The technical answer is interesting but you should really consider the future consequences of purchasing a home with an obvious red flag. If you buy this home, you will eventually want to sell the home. Many potential buyers will most likely be turned off by the antenna. Not all buyers are proactive enough to educate themselves (or ask Slashdot to educate them) about RF emissions. Regardless of whether or not the home is safe, I would advise against purchasing it.
... Faraday cage.
When you are already in doubt that this radiation could be a serious health risk, why do you still consider buying it? When in 10 years the radiation is known to cause longterm damage, it will be too late.
Just line the walls with aluminum foil. :-)
Forget the inverse of the square and everyone else who's trying to find the most technical analysis to your dilemma. Seems you've all missed the point. Get an inexpensive electromagnetic field detector (you can even make one) and scan the apartment for electromagnetic radiation. If it is consistently above 3 to 5 milligauss then you may want to reconsider. If it is higher, then you ask yourself whether or not you 'feel' strange in the apartment (due to the electromagnetic fields possibly being an influence on your brain). The only way to know is to test it for yourself.
Here's something else to consider. If you go as far as to turn your apt into an Faraday cage, use EMF shielding paint, or whathaveyou, you would probably draw the ire of the cellular co. Since your apt is so close to the tower, any shielding in your apt could affect other users "downstream" in a fairly wide radius. Plus, the apt is in Manhattan, so that could mean the tower serves hundreds or even thousands of users! The cellular co may accuse you of "cellphone jamming" or "blocking cellphone services", both of which are illegal in the US.
Or it means that different people are affected differently, and it becomes a question of who gets into the studies.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
Why not assume the obvious - the post is a troll?
I'm pretty sure I grew up in that very apartment and I came out just fine!
*puts custom tard helmet complete with propeller back on and proceeds to charge the concrete wall headfirst repeatedly*
Hams typically are well educated unlike Slashdot AC posters that like to be outraged at things they know absolutely nothing about.
P.S. you have a 1000Watt 2.4ghz transmitter in your home.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Warm up a cup of coffee in your microwave oven and drink it while you look over these measurements I made at my house: http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/EVDOforums/radiation.pdf n6gn
> 20W 3dB 6 meters the power density is 0.0086 mW/cm2
I tend to agree - most likely there is very little radiation actually reaching the apartment. Just get a cheap RF meter and check how significant the background radiation is compared to a mobile phone. Chances are that it is negligible - and that would answer your question.
Yes, don't believe scientists, believe the Italian courts!
I suppose there's a chance they're better at science than at law though.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
that even the rich can be ignorant. and by good to know, I mean really sad.
If you can buy a penthouse in manhatten, you should consider education as a good way to spend money.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Nah, you can make a bullet for pennies. Lead is cheap, so are tin and antimony for lead alloys. Bullet molds and lead smelters are also cheap.
Good gunpowder is a lot harder to make, but doable (a bit of nitric acid and cotton, then mix with ether and alcohol and make into a powder). It's the primers that are tough, got to get a hold of a stable high explosive for that one. Making it yourself is pretty freaking dangerous.
Buying bullets is pretty damned expensive though.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
Used use 10*ln(x) for db instead of 10*log(x) for db. The equivalent distance should be 5.6 cm
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Here's a link to the FCC and OET regulations that the cell company has to comply with.
If there are multiple antennas from different installations, they have to take those into account too.
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/
...and nobody's PROVED that the Loch Ness Monster, Easter Bunny and God don't exist either.
Maybe there's a logical fallacy about proving non-existence in your non-assumptions.
No sig today...
The worry will have more effect on your health than the actual microwaves.
If you have the slightest worry about the physics involved then it's not right for you.
No sig today...
While it seems the scientists are still out on the long term effects of low level electromagnetic radiation exposure, consider that the Placebo Effect is well known and quite real. If you think you are going to feel ill as a result of being exposed to the radiation, you probably will.
Personally, I am a little dubious that it is harmful, since we are constantly bathed in all sorts of low level electromagnetic radiation just living on Earth. Its possible that microwave radiation can cause caner, but any more so than tv, radio waves, UV, infrared, etc?
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
But only for using Ask Slashdot as a means to brag about buying a penthouse in Manhattan.
Obviously, you have not considered the advantages of living in an apartment subject to heavy microwave radiation. Microwaves heat stuff. To prove this, just put your cat in the microwave and turn it on. Clearly, this means that you will be saving tons of money on your heating bills—the cell phone company will be heating the apartment for free! (Well, maybe they will just be heating conductive objects, like for instance you, but that's all you need during those chilly Manhattan winters.
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
The man who discovered aluminum in 1808, a British chemist named Humphrey Davy, first named it "alumium." When he published in 1812 he had renamed it to "aluminum," which is the name still used in America. So where did that extra "i" come from? Wikipedia has the answer.
'An anonymous contributor to the Quarterly Review, a British political-literary journal, in a review of Davy's book, objected to aluminum and proposed the name aluminium, "for so we shall take the liberty of writing the word, in preference to aluminum, which has a less classical sound."'
That's right. All of the haughtiness with which the British defend their extra syllable, all of the bloodshed spilled over the difference, and all of the mutual incomprehension that ensued is due to a change made against the discoverer's wishes based on the rant of an Anonymous Coward. If that isn't a successful troll I don't know what is.
Your brain is not a computer.
You may want to calculate whether you are going to be in the "near field" of this antenna, the range where magnetic field dominates and decreases as 1/R^3. The radiation pattern of the electrical field is what transmits the signal. However, if you live inside the near field, currents will be induced in you, and you will become warmer. Also, inside the near field, devices like microphones and speakers pick up a lot of interference.
How did that go for you?
No, you got it all wrong: non-ionizing radiation causes longer life expectancy and more college degrees.
And wallpaper your apartment with the grids, and the windows too. Just be sure to ground them onto the plumbing, or opening doors might be fun.
That's what the old U.S. embassy in Moscow had to do, though they just used metal foil. Apparently, the KGB bugs planted throughout the embassy required microwaves to power them, so the Soviets did the obvious thing. Of course, localized microwave beams would just help locate the bugs, so the Soviets blanketed the whole building.
I wonder if the foil wallpaper helped, either to reduce the health hazards or to cut off power to the bugs.
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
You can get conductive fabric to make EMF-shielding curtains from LessEMF.com.
I'd say that ask.metafilter.com is usually better for serious questions like this one, slashdot users know almost nothing outside their own favorite software or programming languages. I'll give you an ask.metafilter.com style answer though :
If you've got the money for a penthouse in Manhattan, then you've got the money to hire a medical doctor and/or electrical engineer who can evaluate the actual radiation levels in the apartment.
You should make an appointment with an M.D. in radiology in NYC, say like Manhattan Diagnostic Radiology. I doubt they'll have the equipment for evaluating the dangers themselves, but a radiology doctor will figure out how you should proceed, and might evaluate you for other cancer risk factors.
Two bonuses :
(1) you might never feel secure unless you have an actual medical opinion.
(2) you'll know how to alley the fears of the next person you sell the apartment to.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Beyond that, while the frequency is in the range of what is used to, say, cook a hot dog in your microwave oven, keep in mind that a modern microwave oven will typically "transmit" over 1 KW of power. A cell broadcast tower does roughly 2% of this, as per was pointed out above.
This sig no verb.
Get the apartment, and then create a resonant chamber that creates interference for the transmitters/receivers. If the equipment can get interference from something you're doing in the apartment, then it is clear that the microwaves are penetrating the walls of the unit.
BTW, why did the previous owner leave the apartment? Died of brain cancer?
Best regards.
I am the anonymous coward who posted this piece. The antennas are sector antennas, not panel antennas.
Puh-leeze. You get more radiation, of the ionizing type, from standing in the sun for fifteen minutes.
Regards;
If it's cheap because everyone fears the radiation, regardless of whether or not it will cook you, you will have trouble selling it for the same reason.
If you are worried in the least, don't buy it. You don't need the stress.
If you want to be clever and get a bargain because you don't need to fear, then (if you can) get someone to measure the RF over a week; chances are it will be okay, but what do I know?
As an investment, remember that the market always depends upon perceived value. Having some gigantic wire beast staring at the window will generate fear in many buyers. Probably why it's going cheap in the first place.
If you are ever thinking of selling, it's probably better just to go for a nice flat that doesn't have any threatening uber-wire modern science gizmo just outside the window. Nothing to do with risk to health, everything to do with perception of risk to health.
This comment was written with the intention to opt out of advertising.
Just wear a tin foil hat when your in your apartment and you will be fine. Plus you will have the added benefit of our reptile overlords not being able to control you.
Since the Antenna is right outside of your dwelling, are they actually paying you to rent the space the signal will be transmitting from? If not, you may ask them to pay you outright or have them fully isolate the signal from entering your dwelling. Otherwise, you can contact the Condo administration and ask for your "kickback" for housing such "dangerous" signals to your dwelling. Has anyone done this in the past?
*Headline News* censorship shuts down the Internet! More at 6PM!
It is very common now for cell sites to be placed in all sorts of unobtrusive uban locations such as the roofs and exterior walls of commercial buildings, or disguised as power poles, trees, or flagpoles. It is also very common for several companies to co-locate at a good location once the first company has built its site. Cell companies tend to rent out space at their location to other companies because those other companies can help them out at other sites. What you need to look at is how many different carriers are set up at the site near the apartment and generally how powerful the transmitters are. Each carrier will install its own antennas, backup power equipment, and power supply cabling which you can often see at least portions of at the site. Some cell sites can have a power output of thousands of watts while others can be much smaller, depending on what sort of area the site is supposed to serve and how good its antenna location is. You can get some approximate idea of how powerful the cell site is by looking at how big the backup power generator is and how large the power supply cabling (i.e. the conduit diameter) to the transmitter is. If there are 3 companies co-located and each has 30+ kw backup generators installed, you can expect that it is a relatively high power site. In general, it seems that people are not happy being located in close proximity to cell transmitters. I have seen cell towers quietly installed on the roofs of office buildings and within a few years, the top floor(s) of the building are devoid of tenants. Office building landlords just factor that into the rent that they charge the cell companies. In your case, you are probably getting a nicer apartment than the same money would get at a cell-free location but when you go to sell the unit, the selling price will reflect the current cell site situation at the time that you sell. If you are serious about buying, try to determine if it is likely that other cell companies will co-locate at the original site, possibly lowering your future value.
Am I just being a jackass?
If you have enough money to afford a penthouse apartment in NYC, then yes, you are probably a jackass.
Remember that any concern you can have another buyer can have. This will effect the value of the apartment negatively. It is highly probable that other health-affective environmental factors may kill you before you would succumb to the radiation exposure from this apartment and exhibit any symptoms therefrom... or it might be the straw that broke the camel's back. But I guarantee you one thing: you will never be able to prove anything in a court of law that would win you damages in a law suit.
If somebody can't hear you its THEIR phone
Why does it do the cell tower any good to have higher power than the handset? Being able to reach a larger area does no good if the radios you're talking to can't reach you back! In fact, I'd expect the towers to be more directional than the handsets, and thus require even less power for two way communication.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
It doesn't matter if you will or won't get irradiated to death living there. Forget about that. Imagine trying to sell the place and the potential BUYERS worrying about being irradiated to death. That perception will lower the value of the property and you won't get as good a deal when you sell. It has a lower cost than similarly sized condos right? That's why you are looking at it and now you are worried. Same thing will happen when you try to sell.
Great advice, but for my family's safety, I'd want a professional survey and a report with a PE signature on it, not an amateur survey.
IANAL, but I guess the answer is yes. Capitalization of the air.
True enough - though one might question the value of those degrees, and whether quality of life is improved if you also have to deal with HMO paperwork?
The lack of evidence that is dangerous is evidence that it is safe.
It is impossible to prove a negative. For example, I could never prove that you are not an android. A perfect android would be indistinguishable from a human in every way, even down to being organic flesh and blood. The best I could do is find something to prove you ARE an android. Now, since there is no evidence to suggest (let alone prove) that you ARE an android, I am pretty confident you are not.
It's the same reason you can never prove that a god does not exist, you can only fail to prove that he does. You can look and look and not find a god, and therefore be reasonably certain that one does not exist, but you can never prove that one does not exist.
In the same way, it is impossible to prove that something is not dangerous (the definition of "safe" is basically "not dangerous"). All you have to have done is miss something and your proof is worthless. However, when we try over and over to find a way something is dangerous, and fail, we can then be confident that it is safe. However, we could still be wrong, and there is no way to prove that the thing is safe.
The only thing close to proof that anything is safe is a failure to prove that it is dangerous.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
I meant to put this in my other post, but oh well.
Cancer rates aren't exactly rising by a whole lot either among children (the leading potential indicator of environmental causes of cancer). A study involving the SEER database at the National Cancer Institute concluded there was no statistically significant increase in cancer rates among children between the 1980's and the late 90's. The CDC more or less agrees, giving a 0.6% yearly increase among children since 1990.
The mortality rate for children with cancer in the same period, however, has plummeted. Obviously that is probably due to better treatment options.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
By that, I mean amateur radio operator. Since the amateur radio service rules include RF exposure safety rules, and we all have to know how to do the math, they will likely be able to reassure you that the situation is safe. The rules for amateur stations are similar to the rules that all other RF transmitting services generally have to follow. Since the condo is not part of the fenced in enclosure where the antenna is, it's part of the 'uncontrolled' space (that is, space where the general public - particularly people not owning or working on the antenna). The exposure limits for uncontrolled space exposure are much stricter than controlled space (that is, any place where a person could be without having the transmitter shut down).
In all likelihood, the antennas in question are aimed such that the energy won't be going into the apartment. How can that be? They have to pay to generate the RF, and they want as much of it as possible to hit the opposite antenna rather than be used to irradiate a nearby condo.
They're selling this unit for a song likely because of the "what if?" thoughts you yourself are having. Educate yourself and turn this into an opportunity to acquire an undervalued property!
Multiple channels don't matter because they're usually pointed in a different direction. Each sector gets its own channel and you can't be in multiple sectors at once. And even if you are exposed by 10 cell tower channels at once, it doesn't overcome the fact that your Wi-Fi AP is probably 100-1000 times stronger, or the fact that your cell phone is 1000-1000000 times stronger.
Just get a cheap RF meter and check
The "cheap RF meter" consists of one (per band) calibrated omni antenna on a plastic tripod, one wideband preamp, and one spectrum analyzer. This set will cost you maybe $20K to buy, or $500 to rent for a week - assuming that you know how to correctly operate it and how to interpret the results.
Anything cheaper than that will give you results that you can't bet your life on.
True, but it's a major minus for a lot of potential buyers later on. Though I guess some paranoid or EMI sensitive types might seek out a place like this...(or bad guys not wanting to be traced...)
Trust me - we've done tests. You want steel wool. Preferably an inch or so thick. You can test this out quite easily, by wrapping your phone in tinfoil, and then calling it. when it rings, you know that's not enough. Steel wool, then tinfoil on the outside, will do just fine.
I agree that treatments are improving, at least for the 5 year horizon, pretty sure I don't want my toddlers receiving radiation or chemo as a "cure" unless they're about to die anyway.
Yeah, by the 1980s we had lead in the air, 30 years of ozone depletion from aerosol cans and all kinds of other goodness that we finally started to reverse - some things are actually getting better.
cell towers tend to operate in the 900 to 1.2 ghz range just like any radiation range time and shielding are factors there are electromagnetic meters that can show you your exposier, sometimes a cheap AM radio can on static can give interesting results. the higher the frequency the smaller the fish and the better "net" you need. the shielding doesnt need to be thick or even block light very fine metal screen or metalic mylar may give shielding, a multimeter that shows conduction and the film is grounded properly can be effective. also flat pannels attached at 90 degree angle will reflect the radiation away, if the cell company complains you can use the argument that the freq energy is too low to be harmful to people should also not be harmful to equipment especially at double the distance. im not an expert so take with grain of salt,, might take a look at amateur radio info or find a ham operator,, even if it doesnt directly effect you it may effect other items like electronics, also walls are no garentee of protection.
Let's do the math: Ask a biochemist or a physicist.
If you calculate the energy required to break a carbon-carbon molecular bond (348 kJ/mol) you can caluate the mininum frequency which can generate that energy, as > 600 THz. Your cellular antennas transmit between 0.8 and 1.99 GHz, nowhere close by over four orders of magnitude.
Now, sunlight is dangerous, but not a 20W transceiver 6' away. Police cars typically use higher power radios, and you don't see them kvetching about the risk.
If you are still concerned, put some aluminum window scren on the wall where the antennas are mounted, and stucco over the screen.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/emf.html debunks the 'power lines cause leukemia' myth, BTW.
There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
http://www.aliexpress.com/product-gs/279205814-Anti-radiation-knitted-men-s-underwear-wholesalers.html
How many more years will slashdot have an off-by-one error on your Score in your profile?
Yeah, the #1 cause of death is birth...
I've watched "the experts" stand around and scratch various body parts while they tried to explain the mercury concentration in the Florida Everglades, explanations like "naturally occuring" and "gee, we just don't know" were floated for about 10 years after the top predators started dying of mercury poisioning. After enough of that nonsense, somebody finally got the "clean" waste incinerators in the neighboring counties to just shut down, and miracle of miracles, mercury levels dropped and the alligators stopped dying with toxic loads of it in their brains.
High enough levels of non-ionizing radiation are definitely deadly, marginally lower levels cannot really be called "safe" in long-term exposure, and the "science" involved in declaring certain levels safe isn't really all that scientific. I still use cell-phones, live in a city, etc. and I don't think that it's going to kill me, but some common sense precaution is also called for.
I wouldn't move into that apartment unless you love Luekemia or some other illness sweeping over you. I had a good friend who lived in an apartment directly underneath a bank of cell antennas. He was a video editor and occasionally he would give us copies of what he was working on but they would always be distorted and have big noisy sections in them. Thanks to the cell towers burst disrupting his electrical equipment. He should have taken that as a warning, because now he has cancer.
If you think you might ever sell the thing, consider that the potential buyers will have the same questions.
"You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson
I read that The Soviets used microwaves beamed against windows of the U.S. embassy to eavesdrop on conversations and the side effect was physical ailments. Intensity of the beams will be the question whose answer decides this one.
Cranky educator.
You need the information before you move in and more importantly you need the information should any change be made to the transmitter.
While a tinfoil hat is silly and not stylish it might make sense to sandwich inexpensive copper screen and steel wool between 1/4" plywood, decorate it and make a headboard for the bed with it. No need to tell anyone either...
I do not believe that there is a hazard but I do not sleep on railroad tracks either.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
I posted this response already to someone else asking a similar problem.
First of all, let me say that cell phones are such low power that they're inconsequential and the largest studies have confirmed this. The amount of energy we're talking about isn't enough to raise your temperature 1/100th of a degrees even in the worst case, and the temperature of the room and the clothing you wear is a much larger factor.
Second, you're making the cumulative effects argument. But even if you use the cell phone 5 minutes a day, that's 288 times less cumulative exposure. But the phone is 1000 to 1000000 times greater in strength which means 5 minutes of cell phone exposure is orders of magnitude more cumulative energy than a cell tower.
Third, I reject the cumulative effect argument. Can you say that jumping off a 1 foot cliff 100 times is as harmful as jumping off a 100 foot cliff a single time? What if I exposed you to one hour of sunlight but concentrated it down to 5 minutes? Does one hour exposure do the same cumulative damage as the same amount of sunlight given to you in 5 minutes? These examples demonstrate how absurd the cumulative effect argument is.
"Liters is for Coke, not gas."
You mean petro?
"Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins
Very particularly placed wire on internal wall nearest transmitter.
Apply power.
Transmitter go boom.
Repeat until transmitter owner gets fed up and relocates it.
Hopefully not to your roof.