Just gonna drop this here :-)

"To reduce radio frequency radiation near your body:

• Get a hands-free headset that connects directly to your phone.
• Use speaker-phone more often."

https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/cell_phones._faq.html#:~:text=Do%20cell%20phones%20give%20off,cause%20health%20problems%20years%20later.

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet

https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/cell-phones/do-cell-phones-pose-health-hazard

A hands free is great but then most would have the hand free in ear and the radiation emitting phone in there pocket next to vital organs lol

ANDY00 said

A hands free is great but then most would have the hand free in ear and the radiation emitting phone in there pocket next to vital organs lol

Are they still vital at the average age of the (male) PP photographer?

- mind you, the radiation might cure the prostate problems  ;)

It was obviously a slow news day at Fox 32. :-(

There have been more studies into this than you can shake a stick at, and so far none have shown any convincing evidence of health hazards due to mobile 'phone use.  The NHS does, however suggest that children should limit their mobile 'phone use: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c90eded915d6969f45c79/dh_124899.pdf

Just to add, your WiFi at 2.4Ghz and/or 5Ghz is also within the same range as microwaves.

Gothic Image said

It was obviously a slow news day at Fox 32. :-(

There have been more studies into this than you can shake a stick at, and so far none have shown any convincing evidence of health hazards due to mobile 'phone use.  The NHS does, however suggest that children should limit their mobile 'phone use: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c90eded915d6969f45c79/dh_124899.pdf

I think the point of the whistleblower is that the information out there is wholly inaccurate and has been suppressed. In reality, the effects have been proven to be much worse than we were led to believe. It’s more than likely that this suppression aims to protect the USD 457.18 billion mobile phone industry. Of course, they would never threaten people’s health for money, right? (Note the sarcasm.) 😅📱💡 

ANDY00 said

I think the point of the whistleblower is that the information out there is wholly inaccurate and has been suppressed. In reality, the effects have been proven to be much worse than we were led to believe. It’s more than likely that this suppression aims to protect the USD 457.18 billion mobile phone industry. Of course, they would never threaten people’s health for money, right? (Note the sarcasm.) 😅📱💡 

That's just tin foil hat nonsense.  How have "they" managed to suppress all the reports carried out across the world, including the UK?  More conspiracy theorists trading on gullible media.

Suppressed?

“The NTP studies found that high exposure to RFR (900 MHz) used by cell phones was associated with:

• Clear evidence of an association with tumors in the hearts of male rats. The tumors were malignant schwannomas.
• Some evidence of an association with tumors in the brains of male rats. The tumors were malignant gliomas.”
• Some evidence of an association with tumors in the adrenal glands of male rats. The tumors were benign, malignant, or complex combined pheochromocytoma.”

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones

Gothic Image said

ANDY00 said

I think the point of the whistleblower is that the information out there is wholly inaccurate and has been suppressed. In reality, the effects have been proven to be much worse than we were led to believe. It’s more than likely that this suppression aims to protect the USD 457.18 billion mobile phone industry. Of course, they would never threaten people’s health for money, right? (Note the sarcasm.) 😅📱💡 

That's just tin foil hat nonsense.  How have "they" managed to suppress all the reports carried out across the world, including the UK?  More conspiracy theorists trading on gullible media.

To be honest i don't know and I'm far from an expert but the guy on the news is Vice president for environmental health trust so he seems pretty much an expert in his field i would say. and Huw above seems to be pretty clued up on it also, but im just over here with my tin foil hat :-D

In response to hiding reports, we have literally just come through a time in history when the entire planet was not only lied to about a vaccine; many were forced to take it. So yes, it happens. These things occur when money or politics are involved—absolutely no tin foil hat required.

I could list some of the stuff they have said is healthy, Cigarettes is an obvious one, but what about cereals, Coal butter... they're not they never have been they are waste products most animals and insects cannot even eat, but moneys involved so the health boards indorse them,

Edited by ANDY00

ANDY00 said

To be honest i don't know and I'm far from an expert but the guy on the news is Vice president for environmental health trust so he seems pretty much an expert in his field i would say. and Huw above seems to be pretty clued up on it also, but im just over here with my tin foil hat :-D

Edited by ANDY00

Anyone can give themselves an impressive sounding title, but who exactly are The Environmental Health Trust? Try Googling "Environmental Health Trust credibility" for some interesting opinions.   Personally, I'd rather rely on proper research from credible organisations, as both Huw and I have referred to above.

Gothic Image said

ANDY00 said

To be honest i don't know and I'm far from an expert but the guy on the news is Vice president for environmental health trust so he seems pretty much an expert in his field i would say. and Huw above seems to be pretty clued up on it also, but im just over here with my tin foil hat :-D

Edited by ANDY00

Anyone can give themselves an impressive sounding title, but who exactly are The Environmental Health Trust? Try Googling "Environmental Health Trust credibility" for some interesting opinions.   Personally, I'd rather rely on proper research from credible organisations, as both Huw and I have referred to above.

Try Googling, doctor! 😄 People believe what they see, and these days, they believe titles a little less anyway. Cancer rates are up. If you like statistics, here’s one: Worldwide, the number of cancer cases in people under 50 years old rose by nearly 80% from 1990 to 2019. I would say that’s a pretty good indication that we are doing something wrong. 😅 I’m not blaming it all on mobiles; foods play a part, as I’ve said, along with other factors. I’m just saying I’m glad I did not allow my children to keep their mobiles under their pillows.

Edited by ANDY00

ANDY00 said

Try googling doctor! or Survey :-D people believe what they see and these days people believe titles a little less anyway, Cancer rates are up , if you like statistic so much here one - Worldwide, the number of cancer cases in people under 50 years old rose by nearly 80% from 1990 to 2019, i would say that's a pretty good indication we are doing something wrong :-)

Edited by ANDY00

But has anyone demonstrated a causal link between mobile 'phone use and cancer?  No.

I'm not saying that the possibility should be ignored so I respect the advice of the NHS and WHO, but I'm not getting excited about the views of conspiracy theorists.

Gothic Image said

ANDY00 said

Try googling doctor! or Survey :-D people believe what they see and these days people believe titles a little less anyway, Cancer rates are up , if you like statistic so much here one - Worldwide, the number of cancer cases in people under 50 years old rose by nearly 80% from 1990 to 2019, i would say that's a pretty good indication we are doing something wrong :-)

Edited by ANDY00

But has anyone demonstrated a causal link between mobile 'phone use and cancer?  No.

I'm not saying that the possibility should be ignored so I respect the advice of the NHS and WHO, but I'm not getting excited about the views of conspiracy theorists.

Did you listen to the news cast? he literally names studies that prove they cause cancers and cell breakdowns tested in humanized mice, and there's the ones Huw linked above also, there have been hundreds he said that, but they were hidden, suppressed, not released to public.

ANDY00 said

Gothic Image said

ANDY00 said

Try googling doctor! or Survey :-D people believe what they see and these days people believe titles a little less anyway, Cancer rates are up , if you like statistic so much here one - Worldwide, the number of cancer cases in people under 50 years old rose by nearly 80% from 1990 to 2019, i would say that's a pretty good indication we are doing something wrong :-)

Edited by ANDY00

But has anyone demonstrated a causal link between mobile 'phone use and cancer?  No.

I'm not saying that the possibility should be ignored so I respect the advice of the NHS and WHO, but I'm not getting excited about the views of conspiracy theorists.

Did you listen to the news cast? he literally names studies that prove they cause cancers and cell breakdowns tested in humanized mice, and there's the ones Huw linked above also, there have been hundreds he said that, but they were hidden, suppressed, not released to public.

He can, presumably, prove that? 

ANDY00 said

Gothic Image said

ANDY00 said

Try googling doctor! or Survey :-D people believe what they see and these days people believe titles a little less anyway, Cancer rates are up , if you like statistic so much here one - Worldwide, the number of cancer cases in people under 50 years old rose by nearly 80% from 1990 to 2019, i would say that's a pretty good indication we are doing something wrong :-)

Edited by ANDY00

But has anyone demonstrated a causal link between mobile 'phone use and cancer?  No.

I'm not saying that the possibility should be ignored so I respect the advice of the NHS and WHO, but I'm not getting excited about the views of conspiracy theorists.

Did you listen to the news cast? he literally names studies that prove they cause cancers and cell breakdowns tested in humanized mice, and there's the ones Huw linked above also, there have been hundreds he said that, but they were hidden, suppressed, not released to public.

The two NTP studies (rats and mice) probably cost at least 5 million dollars to run. Maybe more.

There won’t be many serious studies because of the cost.