Re: "no known plausible biophysical mechanism"? Er, melatonin reduction, DNA damage, oxidative stress? Archived Message
Posted by walter on May 23, 2020, 12:39 am, in reply to "Re: "no known plausible biophysical mechanism"? Er, melatonin reduction, DNA damage, oxidative stress?"
It probably is all EMR, assuming that's that you meant (same as EMF, F for fields as opposed to R for radiation) as these kinds of results appear across the main types in use (very high frequencies like microwaves or low ones from mains appliances or power lines etc). However I've tried to keep to mobile or other microwave studies, except where the content I am responding to deviated from this. It's very hard to parameterize as all effects are dependent on the state of the organism affected, as well as the exposure parameters. It's looking increasingly clear that brain tumours arise after long term and/or heavy mobile use. But these mechanistic effects like oxidative stress and the others arise quickly. The problem there is a chronic build-up leading to illness, as it does when caused by other things. DNA damage I don't know - it's usually repaired, but cancer arises when the repair mechanisms fail so that's presumably a build up of erosion of defences (melatonin is a key defence) Keeping the phone away from your head is best (you can get tubes for this), but I've not observed anyone doing this. Could be a good idea if you have long mobiles calls at home. When dialling, the mobile signal is much stronger as it belts out at a max rate looking for the nearest mast, then it adjusts to a lower level. It's a good idea not to keep the phone at your head for this few seconds. This might not apply after 5G is rolled out as there will be masts everywhere. Hope helpful
|
| Message Thread: | This response ↓
- Even Scientific American admits that 5G could devastate public health - rippon May 20, 2020, 9:09 am
- Good article. Thanks. And, even better, nothing about Sars-2! - Der May 20, 2020, 10:12 am
- I am just watching the 5G debate on utube - Adamski May 20, 2020, 10:20 am
- For clarity, the SA article was an opinion piece by Moskowitz himself - Matt May 21, 2020, 7:30 am
- Re: For clarity, the SA article was an opinion piece by Moskowitz himself - walter May 21, 2020, 11:21 pm
- The rest of the introduction - walter May 22, 2020, 12:04 am
- To the detail we go - walter May 22, 2020, 2:42 am
- Thanks for the comments / analysis all nt - Matt May 22, 2020, 11:52 am
- More on that Interphone study - walter May 22, 2020, 12:38 pm
- And that Danish study - walter May 22, 2020, 1:44 pm
- The next thing he links to, radar safety, is nonexistent - walter May 22, 2020, 2:09 pm
- "no known plausible biophysical mechanism"? Er, melatonin reduction, DNA damage, oxidative stress? - walter May 22, 2020, 5:42 pm
- Re: "no known plausible biophysical mechanism"? Er, melatonin reduction, DNA damage, oxidative stress? - Adamski May 22, 2020, 11:29 pm
- Re: "no known plausible biophysical mechanism"? Er, melatonin reduction, DNA damage, oxidative stress? - walter May 23, 2020, 12:39 am
- In summary: this response to Moskowits is nothing but bluster and misllading spin; no substance (nm) - walter May 22, 2020, 5:44 pm
- Thanks Matt. Rippon - no comment to - Adamski May 21, 2020, 9:38 pm
- Rippon - what do you say to my mate who reckons - Adamski May 22, 2020, 9:21 am
|
|