| >We do study such effects. It's called a highly lucrative field of dermatology. Luckily, however, humans had billions of years to evolve alongside the sunlight, but phototherapy of all sorts is quite popular, and skin photo-damage is discussed at probably every appointment? I said artificial light as in visible, not near-ionizing UV which has well understood mechanisms that lead to cancer. There are multi tens of watt transmitters all around us for hours per day that nobody seems to worry about, yet everyone seems worried about milliwatt transmitters of much lower photon energy. We have evolved to sunlight and yet we still get cancer from it and its due to the photon energy, shouldn't we be looking at artificial terahertz radiation at much higher power levels with more vigor than gigahertz? >EMF and mast cells? Now that's really pushing the envelope. That sort of research isn't going to get you anything but a tinfoil hat. Nobody does it. No money or fame in it. Why do it? If anyone publishes a paper that implies cellphone radiation causes health issues it gets quite a bit of attention, not really buying that there is no motivation, there are countless books and websites making money off these papers lately. >N.B.: the SAR in that study is on the same order of magnitude as your iphone. No its 4 W/kg whole body for 5 hours per day for 12 weeks unmodulated continuous 835Mhz, FFC regulates to 1.6 W/kg over the gram getting the most power (basically the gram of flesh where antenna is closest to your head). >Demyelination if found in humans could mean dx of multiple sclerosis, a devastating illness...and ADHD-like hyperactive behaviour? Wonderful. From the paper: "The rota rod test was done to determine the impact of chronic RF-EMF exposure on behavioural changes. This test is widely used to evaluate motor dysfunctions, especially coordination and balance. There was no significant difference between the control and RM-EMF groups" and "The observations of autophagosome formation and down-regulation of pro-apoptotic factor Bax suggested a lack of neuronal damage." They then go on to pick some slides of what might be myelin damage hopefully they didn't cherry pick them. Should be easy to reproduce the results. The mice seemed to move more in the study so thus where called "hyperactive" hopefully there wasn't a buzzing noise from the transmitter or some other environmental factor agitating the RF group. Again this stuff should be easily reproducible in further studies. >Could be safe. Could be multiple sclerosis. NBD. Could cure MS, could give you superpowers as others have cited in this post have suggested, could be a teapot orbiting the sun we don't know about. We should keep looking but lets be level headed about it. |