are politicians being paid off by the telecoms industry to force harmful, untested and uninsurable microwave transmitters onto the population?
Are politicians being paid off by the telecoms industry to force harmful...
Anthony Wilson
Other urls found in this thread:
ehtrust.org
ntp.niehs.nih.gov
ehtrust.org
twitter.com
Jaxson Nelson
5G development is one of the few booms we can cling onto to keep up GDP growth
They don't need to be paid off per se, I just thing they're desperate for anything that gets people excited. 5G conspiracies really don't fall in line with its development cycle; they wouldn't take so long to produce mediocre and costly improvements if it were a scheme for some unethical experiment (and I do acknowledge that's conjecture).
Jacob Campbell
Are you aware of the NTP study? They used old 2G and 3G signals which are much less deadly than LTE and above.
Nolan Ortiz
Any health concerns I would assume are accidental or due to negligence rather than because of an overarching plan.
Points and headlines are not useful. It's better to use quotes and data directly, see below
>The exposures used in the studies cannot be compared directly to the exposure that humans experience when using a cell phone,” said John Bucher, Ph.D., NTP senior scientist. “In our studies, rats and mice received radio frequency radiation across their whole bodies. By contrast, people are mostly exposed in specific local tissues close to where they hold the phone. In addition, the exposure levels and durations in our studies were greater than what people experience.
Paraphrasing the rest of the study, it found that the radiation correlated to harmful effects with male rats only, not female rats or any mice. This is 2G and 3G; 5G has not been included in the NTP tests because the full technology is not available.
Samuel Howard
The "exposure levels were high" talking point is a misnomer:
>This statement misrepresents risk to the brain from the whole-body exposures used in the NTP study. While the exposure limit to RF radiation in the US is 0.08 W/kg averaged over the whole body, the localized exposure limit is 1.6 W/kg averaged over any one gram of tissue. Body tissues located nearest to the cell phone antenna receive much higher exposures than tissues located distant from the antenna. Thus, when an individual uses a cell phone and holds it next to his or her head, exposure to the brain will be much higher than exposures averaged over the whole body. When considering organ-specific risk (e.g., risk to the brain) from cell phone RF, the important measure of exposure is the SAR value of 1.6 W/kg averaged over any gram of tissue. In the NTP study in which animals were exposed to whole-body RF at SARs of 1.5, 3, and 6.0 W/kg, exposures in the brain were within 10% of the whole-body exposure levels. Therefore, in the NTP study, exposure intensities in the brain of rats were similar to or only slightly higher than localized human exposures from cell phones held next to the head.
Eli Cruz
you can't pay taxes if you're dead you dumb fucking retard
John Evans
we dont fucking need 5g for anything though
Asher Gonzalez
Does anyone have that picture of a tree missing half its leaves from the UK? It was next to a 5G tower or something. Here in my area they've begun installing 5G and I never noticed the amount of deformed trees and trees with exactly half their leaves missing... fucking wack.
Juan Williams
My point really is not reliant on how heavy the exposure levels are, but moreso that they can mean completely different things between species and to different parts of the body. It was observed that the male rats affected tended to live longer despite the negative consequences, possibly because reduced likelihood of kidney disease.
What you can take away from this is that there is no hard proof of any severe health risks in 5G, especially any that did not exist beforehand. The technology evidently isn't quite ready to be examined, so I doubt we would see any particular difference until then.
It's purely about profit. If it can make money, everybody will probably be on board. I would rather 4G be fully implemented nationwide, or that we get fiber optics in smaller cities, but it's still better than no progress.
Robert Carter
>the rats lived longer
Actually, there was no statistical difference in survival between control male rats and the exposure group with the highest rate of gliomas and heart schwannomas (CDMA-exposed male rats, SAR= 6.0 W/kg). Also, no glial cell hyperplasias (potential precancerous lesions) or heart schwannomas were observed in any control rat, even though glial cell hyperplasia was detected in RF-exposed rats as early at week 58 of the 2-year study and heart schwannomas were detected as early as week 70 in exposed rats. Thus, survival was sufficient to detect tumors or pre-cancerous lesions in the brain and heart of control rats.
If a human gets exotic heart or brain cancer, what good is living longer with a better kidney?
What we can take away from this is that 5G and 4G must be rolled back immediately as the much less damaging 2G and 3G signals have been shown to have massively negative effects with much less exposure than in real life (cell towers are on 24/7 even when people are sleeping, study was 10 minutes on 10 minutes off 9 hours a day)
Jack Garcia
What would be the unjewed alternative to the typical cellphone technologies?
Aiden Parker
Maybe we're looking at different things, it's beside the point anyway. I'm not claiming that it's a good trade, just that localized examinations would likely be much more useful than full-body exposure.
The study was certainly not producing extreme enough results to conclude that all wireless signals are hazardous to all animals, or that a real-world test would have similar results. The point was to find any reason for concern (which there is, I won't deny that) in a worst case scenario. Proof hasn't been published that this is necessarily a major concern for humans, or even a bigger concern than damage caused by other technology, like car crashes.
Grayson Howard
unfortunately it seems wireless is just plain harmful in almost all its incarnations. fiber optic must be the future for humanity to survive.
Elijah Butler
Dude, cut off your head before it spreads to the rest of your body.
Robert Young
You can stop pretending to be an impartial Jow Forums user now telecoms shill
James Miller
That doesn't go against anything I've said. Leave the ad hominem out of this, if you want anybody to care.
Jordan Long
Your attempts to calm and redirect anyone's concerns are so blatant. Typical industry play. relying on the ignorance of the population.
It stop with 5G.
Colton Carter
That has nothing to do with proving your point. I could just as easily accuse you of resorting to character attacks and speculation when you no longer have evidence to refute with, and I'd probably be right.
There hasn't been any study that has clearly linked health risks in humans to any form of cell tower (at least relevant to this discussion), or you probably would have brought it up by now.
Logan Anderson
Rats are used in place of humans in carcinogenicity and other toxicity tests. This is how all chemical testing works.
There is clear evidence that microwaves cause cancer in humans, particularly cancers of the heart and brain. It's as simple as that.
Nolan Hill
That's an assumption, not a direct proof. Mice can also be used, and did not show any clear signs of ill effect.
>There is clear evidence that microwaves cause cancer in humans
Citation needed, and microwaves are much broader than current 4G, or even 5G
Dylan Cruz
Did you get tired of getting btfo on /sci/ and Jow Forums? Now you're on here putting on your "impartial Jow Forums user quelling any concerns about the undemocratic contamination of the world with microwaves" face.
Pretty pathetic.
Juan Morgan
Again, you fail to follow up with evidence.
Adam Long
The evidence is the NTP study; that you're desperately proclaiming it, somehow, as "non-evidence" shows you to be a deranged, useless fantasist.
Truly a disgusting existence you must lead.
Thomas Hall
Isn't the radio wave damage caused by heating? Raising the body temperature of rats to hazardous levels is 100x easier than a humans with the same strength.
I'm not pro or anti 5g, in fact I don't carry my phone near my junk for similar doubts but wouldn't it be easy to study people who've worked around radio towers all their lives and see if their organs are more fucked up than the citizenry at large?
Julian Gray
The NTP study makes no claims or projections on human subjects, and does not pretend to be accurate to current architecture. You're stretching, to say the least.
Caleb Watson
see
ntp.niehs.nih.gov
worthless non-words that won't stand up in court
Jacob Mitchell
>worthless non-words that won't stand up in court
Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
Elijah Allen
why can't any companies get insurance for their microwave transmitters? is it because the insurers know they are harmful to the point of genocide?
Justin White
That's a loaded question, and really could have nothing to do with it. I wouldn't know. Insurance companies and legal systems operate on different standards.
Grayson Moore
Does scat spam hold up in court?
Levi Hill
What?
Cooper Bennett
Nothing, I just have an inkling that that is what it will come to in the end.
Logan Lopez
You've really lost me, pal.
Blake Butler
I lost you when I posted the NTP study.
Nathaniel Hughes
Satellite transmissions already work for voice calls and data connections, plus unidirectional TV broadcasting. I have no idea how harmful they can be and how economically viable or scalable they are.
Cooper Martinez
Yeah, they've done worse so I'm not sure why some people find it shocking.
Joshua Watson
Let me paraphrase: is the term "RFR exposure" repeated in this study synonymous with "heat"?
"RFR exposure by a cell phone is inversely proportional to the square of the distance of the body from the device’s
antenna, and the highest SAR levels occur in the parts of the body nearest to the antenna"
Sounds like heat transfer, man...
270 pages wow, but I'll do it. Maybe I'm smarter on the subject tomorrow.
Anthony Barnes
the levels were many times lower than thermal
the study is attacked by the seditionist mainstream media and tirelessly suppressed for a reason
Here are some myths about the study which were perpetrated by the MSM debunked (though you're probably smart enough to see through all that).
ehtrust.org
Samuel Walker
no, they're just painting a palm tree green.
Brayden Ortiz
Tiny carbon nano tubemetals in body will maintain some electrical current from background electrical radio waves. Some directed energies are effective to carry these tiny metals. Some magnets also effectively carry these tiny metals. When the metals are moved then the metals carry some of the earlier electricity. There was already background electricity at the place the metal would be carried to. This process is callable as, "collecting" electricity. Sometimes the collected electricity is enough to stimulate muscle movement and even sense of touch, though the electricity was collectable by directed energies sent from machines far away by miles of distance.