-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
EMF Radiation
- Thread starter Ben W
- Start date
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Some context;
The EM spectrum is exponential. A X-Ray photon carries >1,000,000x more energy than a radio wave photon. So non-ionizing radiation has even less of a chance of causing non-thermal biological damage than a mouse fart has of causing wind damage...
The EM spectrum is exponential. A X-Ray photon carries >1,000,000x more energy than a radio wave photon. So non-ionizing radiation has even less of a chance of causing non-thermal biological damage than a mouse fart has of causing wind damage...
I think this is an EMF thread and not the place to discuss Tesla's monitoring of cars. But you can still remove the SIM from the car to disable LTE access.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Ok, I went past the not long on science thing... but had to stop when I got to CB radios cause obesity in truckers.
Many studies do show harm to living organisms from chronic exposure to EMF. This includes damage to cells, destruction of DNA, and the many disorders that stem from such damage such as reproductive issues and cancer.
The statement "there is no evidence" is so outdated that many have continued to repeat it without noticing that the evidence has been pouring in. Here's a link to 1,670 such studies to get you started: 181022_EMF Studies from Powerwatch.pdf
Many techies and tech execs themselves have gotten sick and begun speaking out. The former CTO of Nokia, former president of Microsoft Canada, a former Netflix & Silicon Graphics exec... you can find their talks online. I myself have a degree in computer science, have been a tech professional my entire adult life, and own several Teslas, including the Roadster.
What we can conclude from mounting evidence, is that constant EMF exposure from an unprecedented and ever-increasing number of smart-everything sources is simply not a good idea.
Thankfully, EMF in EVs can be easily mitigated with some inexpensive shielding around the motor and battery. And to be fair, some owner testing shows that the shielding on recent Teslas is fairly good (though many of the videos online are by people who have little idea what they're doing, have the wrong meter, or the right meter on the wrong setting).
But there is something even simpler that Tesla could do right now to significantly reduce EMF exposure for those who care — give owners the ability to turn the vehicle's cellular, WiFi, and Bluetooth radios 'off', which are otherwise constantly on.
This could be achieved with a simple software update to the vehicle, even if the vehicle turned the radios on periodically to check for software updates.
Since other car manufacturers don't do OTA software updates — but also pack their cars with a gaggle of always-on cellular, WiFi, and Bluetooth features — Tesla could again set itself uniquely apart by giving its drivers this ability. Then those who are so inclined can give themselves a rejuvenating break from EMF while they sleep, and while they drive.
The statement "there is no evidence" is so outdated that many have continued to repeat it without noticing that the evidence has been pouring in. Here's a link to 1,670 such studies to get you started: 181022_EMF Studies from Powerwatch.pdf
Many techies and tech execs themselves have gotten sick and begun speaking out. The former CTO of Nokia, former president of Microsoft Canada, a former Netflix & Silicon Graphics exec... you can find their talks online. I myself have a degree in computer science, have been a tech professional my entire adult life, and own several Teslas, including the Roadster.
What we can conclude from mounting evidence, is that constant EMF exposure from an unprecedented and ever-increasing number of smart-everything sources is simply not a good idea.
Thankfully, EMF in EVs can be easily mitigated with some inexpensive shielding around the motor and battery. And to be fair, some owner testing shows that the shielding on recent Teslas is fairly good (though many of the videos online are by people who have little idea what they're doing, have the wrong meter, or the right meter on the wrong setting).
But there is something even simpler that Tesla could do right now to significantly reduce EMF exposure for those who care — give owners the ability to turn the vehicle's cellular, WiFi, and Bluetooth radios 'off', which are otherwise constantly on.
This could be achieved with a simple software update to the vehicle, even if the vehicle turned the radios on periodically to check for software updates.
Since other car manufacturers don't do OTA software updates — but also pack their cars with a gaggle of always-on cellular, WiFi, and Bluetooth features — Tesla could again set itself uniquely apart by giving its drivers this ability. Then those who are so inclined can give themselves a rejuvenating break from EMF while they sleep, and while they drive.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
???? What's the mechanism? It's like claiming a flea flipped a car over. How? The amount of energy is orders of magnitude lower than is necessary to break DNA bonds. There's no known mechanism for ANY biological effect. Stop fear mongering. Fleas cannot flip over cars.
The photons released from an electric motor need >1,000,000,000,000x more energy to break DNA bonds.... a flea flipping over a Model S is more probable.
If possible, could you help me understand the placebo effect on the rats of the
NTP Cell Phone Radiation Study: Final Reports?
Here is a link that refers to that study:
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety: NTP Cell Phone Radiation Study: Final Reports
It's a single study. Here's another single one on humans that found the alternate outcome:
Mobile phone radiofrequency exposure has no effect on DNA double strand breaks (DSB) in human lymphocytes
I'm happy to see it reproduced and to investigate reasons why the results were as they concluded. Reproducibility is imperative.
The body of evidence has some studies that show potential damage, and significantly more studies that show no damage. Focusing on single studies that confirm one's bias in order support a conclusion isn't in anyone's best interests. Continued research is important, but understanding the mechanism is just as important.
How about this one that confirms the one cited above?
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety: Ramazzini Institute Cell Phone Radiation Study Replicates NTP Study
Also, who funds the studies should be the main focus of our attention. Special interests, which some member posting on this thread should know about, often have researchers properly package methodology to get the desired results.
These two studies I just pointed to are to be appreciated exactly for that reason.
Thanks for the link. I'll read the study when I have a chance. Regarding the quoted, my skeptic radar goes on high alert when anyone links from Moskowitz. He's completely willing to ignore good studies that show no damage and focus only on the ones that support his thesis.
Gorski did a nice job of scientifically addressing your rat studies here: No, a rat study with marginal results does not prove that cell phones cause cancer, no matter what <em>Mother Jones</em> and <em>Consumer Reports</em> say
I won't repeat his work, but do suggest you read it through.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
That can be controlled for, but statistical variation remains.
At a p value of 0.95, 1/20 studies will be falsely "positive"
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
If possible, could you help me understand how you think EMF could possibly have a non-thermal biological effect? Neutrinos are literally more likely to have an effect. The probability of them altering the chemistry of your body is ~0% but there are Trillions of them per second and the law of large numbers eventually gets a hit. The probability of non-thermal EMF having an effect is 0%. Not ~0%. 0%.
Seriously... look up solar neutrinos. They can actually cause fission in your body and everyday more of them pass through your body than there are stars in the sky
SCIENCE! Here's a good analogy maybe you'll understand. Imagine a non-thermal biological effect is like winning power ball. The Trillions of neutrinos passing through you every second are like buying ~1k tickets everyday. Given enough time you'll probably win. Non-Ionizing radiation is like checking the numbers everyday. Given enough time you'll... actually it doesn't matter how much time passes because you have to buy a ticket to win. That's just how it works.
Last edited:
Nosken
Active Member
WOW!--I am impressed by your knowledge-Really. If I could make a dumb observation--with no science.
The same people that seem to be very concerned about EMF are, in my observations, the same people that wore those magnetic bracelets, for health reasons, decades ago?
The same people that seem to be very concerned about EMF are, in my observations, the same people that wore those magnetic bracelets, for health reasons, decades ago?
