Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old August 24th 04, 12:48 AM
Truth
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I don't doubt that high levels of RF can be dangerous. The first two chief
engineers I worked with both died of cancer in their 50s.


Wouldn't FM broadcast antennas be an even greater concern? The height of
most adults would make them resonant somewhere near, or in, the FM broadcast
band.


Comparing wavelengths of "people" based on their height is ridiculous.
Microwaves are a much shorter wavelength and cause much more damage to the human
body, so the wavelength of people based on their height theory needs to be
thrown out right away.

I'd expect energy transfer to be more effiecnt from the FM broadcast
antenna to the human body than it is in the AM broadcast band.


This is like the argument that you should vote for the lesser of two evils,
rather than vote for a good candidate.

Why choose to live near an AM or FM broadcast antenna? I would not want to
live next to either. What is more annoying is how cellular telephone
antennas are getting to be impossible to avoid, and new ones are being put up
every week.

Anyway, there's been over 80 years of kW+ levels of AM broadcasting, and it
seems strange this leukemia concern has gone unnoticed until now.


80 years is only one generation of people. Give it time. Old time radio
commercials have doctors endorsing cigarettes that are healthy and good for you
and your throat.

Cell phones have not been in use long enough for the evidence to exist to
convince those that don't have the radio background to know how dangerous they
are now, without needing to see several generations of people suffer from them
first.

Aspartame is only now starting to get the attention that I was aware of decades
ago.

Now we have Sucralose (not sucrose) and Ace K, and again, we will have to wait
around 20 years or longer before enough people have suffered to start to
consider them a health threat.



  #2   Report Post  
Old August 24th 04, 05:26 AM
David Eduardo
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Truth" wrote in message ...

80 years is only one generation of people. Give it time. Old time
radio
commercials have doctors endorsing cigarettes that are healthy and good
for you
and your throat.


Definition time:

"Generation, interval of time between the birth of parents and the birth of
their offspring. This is usually taken to be approximately 30 years. All
children of one set of parents are members of the same generation although
they may be years apart in age
© 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.


  #3   Report Post  
Old August 25th 04, 11:17 PM
Harris
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In rec.radio.shortwave Truth wrote:
I don't doubt that high levels of RF can be dangerous. The first two chief
engineers I worked with both died of cancer in their 50s.


Wouldn't FM broadcast antennas be an even greater concern? The height of
most adults would make them resonant somewhere near, or in, the FM broadcast
band.


Comparing wavelengths of "people" based on their height is ridiculous.
Microwaves are a much shorter wavelength and cause much more damage to the human
body, so the wavelength of people based on their height theory needs to be
thrown out right away.


To oversimplify a bit: Low frequencies (like AM broadcast) pass through
the body without being absorbed. Microwave frequencies bounce off the body
without being absorbed. It's the frequency range between 30 and 300 MHz
where maximum absorption takes place.

Art H.


  #4   Report Post  
Old August 27th 04, 02:44 AM
Truth
 
Posts: n/a
Default

To oversimplify a bit: Low frequencies (like AM broadcast) pass through
the body without being absorbed. Microwave frequencies bounce off the body
without being absorbed.


ROTFFL!!!

Why not PROVE your ridiculous theory by putting your head into a microwave oven!

........yeah. I didn't think so.


  #5   Report Post  
Old August 27th 04, 07:38 PM
21C BBS
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Within these hallowed halls, Truth of added the
following to the collective conscience:
To oversimplify a bit: Low frequencies (like AM broadcast) pass
through the body without being absorbed. Microwave frequencies
bounce off the body without being absorbed.


ROTFFL!!!

Why not PROVE your ridiculous theory by putting your head into a
microwave oven!

.......yeah. I didn't think so.


I was actually wondering what this post of yours had to do with
broadcasting. Even if
it was off topic but informative or entertaining, it would have been better
than just
being a post about being rude to someone.




  #6   Report Post  
Old August 28th 04, 04:37 PM
Art Harris
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Truth wrote:
Harris wrote:
To oversimplify a bit: Low frequencies (like AM broadcast) pass through
the body without being absorbed. Microwave frequencies bounce off the body
without being absorbed.


ROTFFL!!!

Why not PROVE your ridiculous theory by putting your head into a microwave oven!


I said this was a simplification. The point is that maximum absorption
occurs in the 30 to 300 MHz range. Microwave frequencies are used for
cooking because they are more practical to produce, not because they
are more effective at heating.

See the ANSI (American National Standards Institute) exposure limits
curve below:

http://www-training.llnl.gov/wbt/hc/.../slide34lg.gif

Greatest rf absorption (minimum allowable exposure) is in the 30 to
300 MHz range.

Art H.

  #7   Report Post  
Old September 8th 04, 08:01 PM
Dan Robbins
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Truth wrote:

To oversimplify a bit: Low frequencies (like AM broadcast) pass through
the body without being absorbed. Microwave frequencies bounce off the body
without being absorbed.



ROTFFL!!!

Why not PROVE your ridiculous theory by putting your head into a microwave oven!

.......yeah. I didn't think so.


.....or by leaning against a 50,000 watt AM antenna while standing on the
ground.

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1412 ­ September 3, 2004 Radionews General 0 September 4th 04 08:35 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402 ­ June 25, 2004 Radionews Policy 1 June 26th 04 02:07 AM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1400 ­ June 11, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 June 16th 04 08:34 PM
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1384 February 20, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 February 27th 04 09:41 AM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 Radionews General 0 January 18th 04 09:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017