Health issues with DECT cordless phones and other pulsing microwavetechnology.

[Ext User(lynx)]

Any comment appreciated re this subject.

I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is
typically 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe. Interestingly
cordless phone manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in
the specifications.

-------------------------------------

The initial market success for DECT was found in Germany in the early
1990s and it was in that country where adverse health effects from DECT
technology soon became apparent. Soon after the introduction of DECT in
Germany Dr. Leberecht von Klitzing, a medical physicist and researcher
from the University of Luebeck had infants brought to him who were
perfectly healthy, but their heart beat became erratic for no obvious
reason. As soon as the DECT cordless phone was removed from the bedroom
or neighboring apartment, the infant's heart beat returned to normal.
(11) Concerns within the German medical community led to the Freiburger
Appeal in October 2002, signed by over 130 medical practitioners from
the German environmental medicine medical organisation,
Interdisziplinäre Gesellschaft für Umweltmedizin e. V. (IGUMED). The
appeal was to express their concern over their medical observations of
adverse health impacts from the use of both cell phones and DECT
cordless phones. Symptoms were attributed to exposure to pulsed
microwave radiation from cell phone and DECT technology. The following
is an extract:

Out of great concern for the health of our fellow human beings do we -
as established physicians of all fields, especially that of
environmental medicine - turn to the medical establishment and those in
public health and political domains, as well as to the public. We have
observed, in recent years, a dramatic rise in severe and chronic
diseases among our patients, especially:

· Learning, concentration, and behavioural disorders (e.g. attention
deficit disorder, ADD)
· Extreme fluctuations in blood pressure, ever harder to influence with
medications
· Heart rhythm disorders
· Heart attacks and strokes among an increasingly younger population
· Brain-degenerative diseases (e.g. Alzheimer–s) and epilepsy
· Cancerous afflictions: leukemia, brain tumors

Moreover, we have observed an ever-increasing occurrence of various
disorders, often misdiagnosed in patients as psychosomatic:
· Headaches, migraines
· Chronic exhaustion
· Inner agitation
· Sleeplessness, daytime sleepiness
· Tinnitus
· Susceptibility to infection
· Nervous and connective tissue pains, for which the usual causes do not
explain even the most conspicuous symptoms

Since the living environment and lifestyles of our patients are familiar
to us, we can see especially after carefully-directed inquiry a clear
temporal and spatial correlation between the appearance of disease and
exposure to pulsed high-frequency microwave radiation (HFMR), such as:

· Installation of a mobile telephone sending station in the near vicinity
· Intensive mobile telephone use
· Installation of a digital cordless (DECT) telephone at home or in the
neighbourhood”. (12)

Specifically in relation to DECT phones the IGUMED called for a ban on
DECT telephones in preschools, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, events
halls, public buildings. They also called for a revision of the DECT
standards to reduce the radiation intensity. (13) The German Federal
Radiation Protection Agency (Bundesamt fur Strahlenschutz – BfS) has
expressed concerns over DECT phone use. They stated in a January 2006
press release that a DECT cordless phone is often the strongest single
source of microwave radiation in a private home. To prevent possible
health risks the Agency recommended minimizing personal radiation
exposure (if a DECT phone is used) by placing the base station in a
place where you do not spend much time, for example a hall. For the
workplace the Agency specifically advised to avoid placing DECT phones
on work desks and called upon manufacturers to redesign the phones to
include a feature of power output control, so that the power output
during a call would be adapted to the distance of the handset from its
base station. This would allow phone use only to the level of power
necessary to keep the communication going and power would be down while
on standby and connected to the base station/charger. (14) In December
of 2005 the Public Health Department, Salzburg Region, Austria issued
advice to the government, schools and parents warning of the lack of
studies available on either short-term or long-term health effects from
WLAN and DECT devices. However the department saw evidence of possible
adverse effects such as headaches, concentration difficulty,
restlessness, and memory problems etc. The official advice of the Public
health Department is not to use WLAN and DECT in Schools or
Kindergartens. (15)

quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/papers/dect.pdf

also: "It is recommended that advice to new parents would be to have
nothing to do with DECT baby monitors whatsoever."

----

Stowe School, the Buckinghamshire public school, also removed part of
its wireless network after a teacher became ill. Michael Bevington, a
classics teacher for 28 years at the school, said that he had such a
violent reaction to the network that he was too ill to teach.

“I felt a steadily widening range of unpleasant effects whenever I was
in the classroom,” he said. “First came a thick headache, then pains
throughout the body, sudden flushes, pressure behind the eyes, sudden
skin pains and burning sensations, along with bouts of nausea. Over the
weekend, away from the classroom, I felt completely normal.”

quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=592

----

see also: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?cat=29




--

rgds,

Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'Never eat yellow snow'

[Ext User(doRk Speed)]

lynx wrote:
>
> Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>
> I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
> phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is
> typically 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe. Interestingly
> cordless phone manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in
> the specifications.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> The initial market success for DECT was found in Germany in the early
> 1990s and it was in that country where adverse health effects from DECT
> technology soon became apparent. Soon after the introduction of DECT in
> Germany Dr. Leberecht von Klitzing, a medical physicist and researcher
> from the University of Luebeck had infants brought to him who were
> perfectly healthy, but their heart beat became erratic for no obvious
> reason. As soon as the DECT cordless phone was removed from the bedroom
> or neighboring apartment, the infant's heart beat returned to normal.
> (11) Concerns within the German medical community led to the Freiburger
> Appeal in October 2002, signed by over 130 medical practitioners from
> the German environmental medicine medical organisation,
> Interdisziplinäre Gesellschaft für Umweltmedizin e. V. (IGUMED). The
> appeal was to express their concern over their medical observations of
> adverse health impacts from the use of both cell phones and DECT
> cordless phones. Symptoms were attributed to exposure to pulsed
> microwave radiation from cell phone and DECT technology. The following
> is an extract:
>
> Out of great concern for the health of our fellow human beings do we -
> as established physicians of all fields, especially that of
> environmental medicine - turn to the medical establishment and those in
> public health and political domains, as well as to the public. We have
> observed, in recent years, a dramatic rise in severe and chronic
> diseases among our patients, especially:
>
> · Learning, concentration, and behavioural disorders (e.g. attention
> deficit disorder, ADD)
> · Extreme fluctuations in blood pressure, ever harder to influence with
> medications
> · Heart rhythm disorders
> · Heart attacks and strokes among an increasingly younger population
> · Brain-degenerative diseases (e.g. Alzheimer–s) and epilepsy
> · Cancerous afflictions: leukemia, brain tumors
>
> Moreover, we have observed an ever-increasing occurrence of various
> disorders, often misdiagnosed in patients as psychosomatic:
> · Headaches, migraines
> · Chronic exhaustion
> · Inner agitation
> · Sleeplessness, daytime sleepiness
> · Tinnitus
> · Susceptibility to infection
> · Nervous and connective tissue pains, for which the usual causes do not
> explain even the most conspicuous symptoms
>
> Since the living environment and lifestyles of our patients are familiar
> to us, we can see especially after carefully-directed inquiry a clear
> temporal and spatial correlation between the appearance of disease and
> exposure to pulsed high-frequency microwave radiation (HFMR), such as:
>
> · Installation of a mobile telephone sending station in the near vicinity
> · Intensive mobile telephone use
> · Installation of a digital cordless (DECT) telephone at home or in the
> neighbourhood”. (12)
>
> Specifically in relation to DECT phones the IGUMED called for a ban on
> DECT telephones in preschools, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, events
> halls, public buildings. They also called for a revision of the DECT
> standards to reduce the radiation intensity. (13) The German Federal
> Radiation Protection Agency (Bundesamt fur Strahlenschutz – BfS) has
> expressed concerns over DECT phone use. They stated in a January 2006
> press release that a DECT cordless phone is often the strongest single
> source of microwave radiation in a private home. To prevent possible
> health risks the Agency recommended minimizing personal radiation
> exposure (if a DECT phone is used) by placing the base station in a
> place where you do not spend much time, for example a hall. For the
> workplace the Agency specifically advised to avoid placing DECT phones
> on work desks and called upon manufacturers to redesign the phones to
> include a feature of power output control, so that the power output
> during a call would be adapted to the distance of the handset from its
> base station. This would allow phone use only to the level of power
> necessary to keep the communication going and power would be down while
> on standby and connected to the base station/charger. (14) In December
> of 2005 the Public Health Department, Salzburg Region, Austria issued
> advice to the government, schools and parents warning of the lack of
> studies available on either short-term or long-term health effects from
> WLAN and DECT devices. However the department saw evidence of possible
> adverse effects such as headaches, concentration difficulty,
> restlessness, and memory problems etc. The official advice of the Public
> health Department is not to use WLAN and DECT in Schools or
> Kindergartens. (15)
>
> quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/papers/dect.pdf
>
> also: "It is recommended that advice to new parents would be to have
> nothing to do with DECT baby monitors whatsoever."
>
> ----
>
> Stowe School, the Buckinghamshire public school, also removed part of
> its wireless network after a teacher became ill. Michael Bevington, a
> classics teacher for 28 years at the school, said that he had such a
> violent reaction to the network that he was too ill to teach.
>
> “I felt a steadily widening range of unpleasant effects whenever I was
> in the classroom,” he said. “First came a thick headache, then pains
> throughout the body, sudden flushes, pressure behind the eyes, sudden
> skin pains and burning sensations, along with bouts of nausea. Over the
> weekend, away from the classroom, I felt completely normal.”
>
> quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=592
>
> ----
>
> see also: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?cat=29
>
>
>
>
You gotta die from something

DS

[Ext User(lynx)]

doRk Speed wrote:

> lynx wrote:
>>
>> Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
> You gotta die from something
>
> DS

I was hoping for some rather more intelligent and informed comment.



--

rgds,

Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
"Hard work never killed anybody" But why take the risk

[Ext User(Dave)]

"lynx" <none@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:12sh0cm6cdkbqc8@news.supernews.com...
> doRk Speed wrote:
>
>>>
>> You gotta die from something
>>
>> DS
>
> I was hoping for some rather more intelligent and informed comment.
>

Go download ARPANSA RPS3 and read it, especially Section 5. You can
download from here:
http://www.arpansa.gov.au/rf_standard.htm

The applicable limts are set quite conservatively and for DECT cordless
telephone the limit is 2W/kg averaged across a 10g sample (using the head
phantom). This is the same as a mobile phone.

There is a general testing exemption for products used by non-aware users
that emit less than 20mW average. For DECT technology the duty cycle is
approx 10%. The typical output peak power for a DECT unit is between 50 mW
and 120 mW, and with a duty cycle of 10% the average power is less than the
20mW threshold. So, in AU most DECT, WDECT and other low power (or low
duty cycle) similar technologies can be sold without being tested for SAR.
If these products are tested the SAR measurements are very low and close to
the maximum sensitivity of the test equipment, resulting in published
figures of low confidence (ie. if you tested the same unit multiple times
you could get lots of different results, all of them being of a small
magnitude).

I am unaware of any known epidemilogical evidence to support the theory that
DECT technology has any effect on health

Hope this helps.

[Ext User(PeterD)]

On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:20:28 +1100, lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote:

>
>Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>
>I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
>phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is
>typically 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe. Interestingly
>cordless phone manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in
>the specifications.
>
>... snip...
>
>Stowe School, the Buckinghamshire public school, also removed part of
>its wireless network after a teacher became ill. Michael Bevington, a
>classics teacher for 28 years at the school, said that he had such a
>violent reaction to the network that he was too ill to teach.
>
>“I felt a steadily widening range of unpleasant effects whenever I was
>in the classroom,” he said. “First came a thick headache, then pains
>throughout the body, sudden flushes, pressure behind the eyes, sudden
>skin pains and burning sensations, along with bouts of nausea. Over the
>weekend, away from the classroom, I felt completely normal.”
>
>quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=592
>
>----
>
>see also: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?cat=29


Those two non-scientific references tell the story--there is (AFAIK)
no evidence that this is a problem. As to the 'teacher' story, it's
easy to see what the *real* story is... <g> A teaching 'classics' for
28 years you have to believe he's a very computer oriented person who
wanted computers in his classroom! (NOT!)

[Ext User(Rod Speed)]

lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote:

> Any comment appreciated re this subject.

> I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
> phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is typically 80mw, which they
> consider to be quite safe. Interestingly cordless phone manufacturers do not state the output of
> their phones in the specifications.

They dont need to when its below the standard.

> -------------------------------------

> The initial market success for DECT was found in Germany in the early 1990s and it was in that
> country where adverse health effects from DECT technology soon became apparent.

Bare faced lie.

> Soon after the introduction of DECT in Germany Dr. Leberecht von Klitzing, a medical physicist and
> researcher from the University of Luebeck had infants brought to him who were perfectly healthy,
> but their heart beat became erratic for no obvious reason. As soon as the DECT cordless phone was
> removed from the bedroom or neighboring apartment, the infant's heart beat returned to normal.
> (11)

How odd that that never actually made it into any peer reviewed medical journal.

There's a reason why it didnt.

> Concerns within the German medical community led to the Freiburger Appeal in October 2002, signed
> by over 130 medical practitioners from the German environmental medicine medical organisation,
> Interdisziplinäre Gesellschaft für Umweltmedizin e. V. (IGUMED). The appeal was to express their
> concern over their medical observations of adverse health impacts from the use of both cell phones
> and DECT cordless phones.

Yawn.

> Symptoms were attributed to exposure to pulsed microwave radiation from cell phone and DECT
> technology.

Easy to claim.

> The following is an extract:

<reams of utterly mindless shit flushed where it belongs>

> ----

> Stowe School, the Buckinghamshire public school, also removed part of its wireless network after a
> teacher became ill.

Well whoopy fucking do. Plenty of teachers did that before
DECT phones and mobile phones showed up, fuckwit.

> Michael Bevington, a classics teacher for 28 years at the school, said that he had such a violent
> reaction to the network that he was too ill to teach.

Just another short circuit between the ears.

> “I felt a steadily widening range of unpleasant effects whenever I was
> in the classroom,” he said. “First came a thick headache, then pains
> throughout the body, sudden flushes, pressure behind the eyes, sudden
> skin pains and burning sensations, along with bouts of nausea. Over
> the weekend, away from the classroom, I felt completely normal.”

Plenty get the same reaction to a room full of bratty kids.

> quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=592

> see also: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?cat=29

No thanks, its just more utterly mindless silly shit.

[Ext User(imorf)]

lynx wrote:
> doRk Speed wrote:
>
>> lynx wrote:
>>>
>>> Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>>>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>> You gotta die from something
>>
>> DS
>
> I was hoping for some rather more intelligent and informed comment.

on the intrawebs?
/snort.

[Ext User(Trevor Wilson)]

"lynx" <none@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:12sgsknjcdkiq73@news.supernews.com...
>
> Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>
> I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
> phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is typically
> 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe. Interestingly cordless phone
> manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in the
> specifications.
>

**Two anecdotal stories do not constitute a properly designed study. I sure
hope you don't use a cellular 'phone. Their power output can be considerably
higher than any DECT 'phone.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Ext User(lynx)]

Dave wrote:

> "lynx" <none@nothere.com> wrote in message
> news:12sh0cm6cdkbqc8@news.supernews.com...
>
>> doRk Speed wrote:
>>
>>> You gotta die from something
>>>
>>> DS
>>>
>> I was hoping for some rather more intelligent and informed comment.
>>
>>
>
> Go download ARPANSA RPS3 and read it, especially Section 5. You can
> download from here:
> http://www.arpansa.gov.au/rf_standard.htm
>
> The applicable limts are set quite conservatively and for DECT cordless
> telephone the limit is 2W/kg averaged across a 10g sample (using the head
> phantom). This is the same as a mobile phone.
>
> There is a general testing exemption for products used by non-aware users
> that emit less than 20mW average. For DECT technology the duty cycle is
> approx 10%. The typical output peak power for a DECT unit is between 50 mW
> and 120 mW, and with a duty cycle of 10% the average power is less than the
> 20mW threshold. So, in AU most DECT, WDECT and other low power (or low
> duty cycle) similar technologies can be sold without being tested for SAR.
> If these products are tested the SAR measurements are very low and close to
> the maximum sensitivity of the test equipment, resulting in published
> figures of low confidence (ie. if you tested the same unit multiple times
> you could get lots of different results, all of them being of a small
> magnitude).
>
> I am unaware of any known epidemilogical evidence to support the theory that
> DECT technology has any effect on health
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>
>

Thanks very much for that. I'll look into it. Perhaps it's a case of
some ppl being more sensitive/affected than others? And if there are
reports of adverse effects with the use of these DECT phones, then
surely they can't be ignored, even if they're not scientifically based.
When I rang Uniden, they said that that the phones (including handsets)
constantly emit full power even on standby, and it was put to me that if
there are several in the house, then the family is virtually living in a
'sea' of (low) radiation! What prompted the original posting, was that I
had purchased one, and when I turned it on, I immediately noticed some
of the effects mentioned in the article quoted- although I had not seen
it then- so I went googling about cordless phones. Since then I have
been switching the phones on and off to see if there is a correlation
between the effects that I feel and the phones being in use, and there
has been. When switching it off, the headache effect and light
headedness diminishes almost immediately. (There are other effects that
I'm reluctant to mention for fear of being considered crazy!) I'm also
very sensitive to mobile phones, so i feel that I simply can't use this
phone at all.


--

rgds,

Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!'

[Ext User(lynx)]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

> "lynx" <none@nothere.com> wrote in message
> news:12sgsknjcdkiq73@news.supernews.com...
>
>> Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>>
>> I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
>> phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is typically
>> 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe. Interestingly cordless phone
>> manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in the
>> specifications.
>>
>>
>
> **Two anecdotal stories do not constitute a properly designed study.

Those were just two examples. However I don't think we can ignore what
evidence there is, and there seems to be plenty of it if you care to
check: http://tinyurl.com/yqvcr7 (see my response to Dave for more comment)

> I sure
> hope you don't use a cellular 'phone. Their power output can be considerably
> higher than any DECT 'phone.
>
>

In fact I can't. I'll get a headache, and a warming effect on the side
of the head, if I use one for just a minute or more. I once was kept on
a call by a Telstra operator for 10 minutes, and had a headache for
three days. Since then I have always used hands free/speakerphone.
Although the newer mobiles seem to have less effect than the earlier
ones had.



--

rgds,

Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'I'm not tense, just terribly, terribly alert'

[Ext User(lynx)]

Rod Speed wrote:

>
> , fuckwit.
>
>

Pig!

[Ext User(Rod Speed)]

lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote
> Dave wrote

>> Go download ARPANSA RPS3 and read it, especially Section 5. You can download from here:
>> http://www.arpansa.gov.au/rf_standard.htm

>> The applicable limts are set quite conservatively and for DECT
>> cordless telephone the limit is 2W/kg averaged across a 10g sample
>> (using the head phantom). This is the same as a mobile phone.

>> There is a general testing exemption for products used by non-aware
>> users that emit less than 20mW average. For DECT technology the duty
>> cycle is approx 10%. The typical output peak power for a DECT unit
>> is between 50 mW and 120 mW, and with a duty cycle of 10% the
>> average power is less than the 20mW threshold. So, in AU most
>> DECT, WDECT and other low power (or low duty cycle) similar
>> technologies can be sold without being tested for SAR. If these
>> products are tested the SAR measurements are very low and close to
>> the maximum sensitivity of the test equipment, resulting in
>> published figures of low confidence (ie. if you tested the same unit
>> multiple times you could get lots of different results, all of them
>> being of a small magnitude).

>> I am unaware of any known epidemilogical evidence to support the theory that DECT technology has
>> any effect on health

>> Hope this helps.

> Thanks very much for that. I'll look into it. Perhaps it's a case of some ppl being more
> sensitive/affected than others?

Nope, its actually a case of no evidence of any affect on health what so ever.

> And if there are reports of adverse effects with the use of these DECT phones, then surely they
> can't be ignored, even if they're not scientifically based.

Corse they should be if they arent scientifically based.

The claims are as stupid as the claims that some fools
make that they have been experimented on by aliens.

> When I rang Uniden, they said that that the phones (including
> handsets) constantly emit full power even on standby,

No they dont.

> and it was put to me that if there are several in the house, then the family is virtually living
> in a 'sea' of (low) radiation!

They are anyway from a variety of other sources like the electrical
wiring, TV transmitters, what the neighbours have, etc etc etc.

> What prompted the original posting, was that I had purchased one, and when I turned it on, I
> immediately noticed some of the effects mentioned in the article quoted- although I had not seen
> it then-

You just had a short circuit between the ears that
would have happened even if you had not bought one.

> so I went googling about cordless phones. Since then I have been switching the phones on and off
> to see if there is a correlation between the effects that I feel and the phones being in use, and
> there has been.

Just the placebo effect.

> When switching it off, the headache effect and light headedness diminishes almost immediately.

And it wouldnt if the effect was real.

> (There are other effects that I'm reluctant to mention for fear of being considered crazy!)

You are crazy anyway.

> I'm also very sensitive to mobile phones,

Pigs arse you are.

I'd bet my house that you couldnt pick it with a proper double blind trial.

> so i feel that I simply can't use this phone at all.

No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use one.

[Ext User(Rod Speed)]

lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote
> Trevor Wilson wrote
>> lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote

>>> Any comment appreciated re this subject.

>>> I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT
>>> cordless phones, and they informed me that the output of their
>>> phones is typically 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe.
>>> Interestingly cordless phone manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in the
>>> specifications.

>> Two anecdotal stories do not constitute a properly designed study.

> Those were just two examples.

Yep, endless examples of that sort of mindless shit.

In spades with even sillier crap like homeopathy, praying to some
damned god or other, holding your mouth just right, etc etc etc.

> However I don't think we can ignore what evidence there is,

There isnt a shred of evidence of any health effects what so ever.

You wouldnt be able to pick when a cordless phone
or mobile was turned on in a proper double blind trial.

> and there seems to be plenty of it if you care to check: http://tinyurl.com/yqvcr7

Not a shred, actually.

> (see my response to Dave for more comment)

That was just as useless.

>> I sure hope you don't use a cellular 'phone. Their power output can be considerably higher than
>> any DECT 'phone.

> In fact I can't. I'll get a headache, and a warming effect on the side of the head, if I use one
> for just a minute or more.

Just your delusion. You wouldnt be able to pick it in a proper double blind trial.

> I once was kept on a call by a Telstra operator for 10 minutes, and had a headache for three days.

You previously claimed it goes away when you turn it off.

Cant have it both ways.

Plenty of people get headaches that last for 3 days.

> Since then I have always used hands free/speakerphone.

Pity those radiate too.

> Although the newer mobiles seem to have less effect than the earlier ones had.

Pity the radiation level hasnt changed. If anything its worse
now that so few of them have real antennas anymore.

[Ext User(Rod Speed)]

lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> , fuckwit.

> Pig!

Insane fruit loop.

[Ext User(lynx)]

Rod Speed wrote:

> lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote
>
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>
>>> , fuckwit.
>>>
>> Pig!
>>
>
> Insane fruit loop.
>
>
>

It's a good thing that you don't breed.

[Ext User(Rod Speed)]

lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote

>>>> , fuckwit.

>>> Pig!

>> Insane fruit loop.

> It's a good thing that you don't breed.

You have absolutely no idea whether I do or not, insane fruit loop.

[Ext User(Dave)]

>>
>> I am unaware of any known epidemilogical evidence to support the theory
>> that DECT technology has any effect on health
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thanks very much for that. I'll look into it. Perhaps it's a case of some
> ppl being more sensitive/affected than others?

IMO, not unless chaos theory applies in the same way a butterfly near the
Amazon causes a cyclone near Broome.

> When I rang Uniden, they said that that the phones (including handsets)
> constantly emit full power even on standby, and it was put to me that if
> there are several in the house, then the family is virtually living in a
> 'sea' of (low) radiation!

There is no way that anyone with decent technical knowledge at Uniden would
have stated that. Simply because it is not true. Their DECT and WDECT phones
do not constantly emit full power when on Standby, instead the base and
handsets periodically poll for each other to make sure they are in range,
etc. Apart from the lack of a practical purpose in needing to do so, the
batteries would be flat in next to no time if they did.

>What prompted the original posting, was that I had purchased one, and when
>I turned it on, I immediately noticed some of the effects mentioned in the
>article quoted-

Well lets match stories.... I too have had experience dealing with people
complaining of headaches caused by the perceived effects of electroagnetic
radiation. In my case we were establishing an open air test site (OATS) for
electromagnetic interference testing. During the advertising stage of the
DA by council, they received two complaints from people regarding the health
effects of the radiation my OATS would emit. One, a 62 year old lady was
experiencing headaches caused by "radiation" from the OATS. When it was
explained to her it hadn't been built and existed only as a paper plan, she
countered she was so sensitive to electromagnetic radiation she could feel
the radiation approaching from wherever we had it stored (quote "It comes
through the air you know, that's how televisions work")

The second, after hearing about the problem from the first (they lived near
each other) wrote a long submission detailing how the radiation would affect
the local poultry and equine industries. It was quite comprehensive and
included an example detailing how his pheasants had recently stopped laying.
He was sure the pheasants (being sensitive birds) could sense the radiation
approaching and the lack of laying was due to headaches the birds were
experiencing.

I am quite sure they could be counted upon to validate your own situation.

[Ext User(Michael)]

> has been. When switching it off, the headache effect and light headedness
> diminishes almost immediately. (There are other effects that

Rubbish, its just your psychologic condition

[Ext User(Michael)]

"lynx" <none@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:12siheb68k8ghb7@news.supernews.com...
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
>>
>> , fuckwit.
>>
>>
>
> Pig!

No, Rod was right, you are a fuckwit
>

[Ext User(HeadRush)]

"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:gr3hs258bapmpq3snhsh99rqs49tq7mfjh@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:20:28 +1100, lynx <none@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Any comment appreciated re this subject.
>>
>>I contacted Uniden, one of the largest manufacturers of DECT cordless
>>phones, and they informed me that the output of their phones is
>>typically 80mw, which they consider to be quite safe. Interestingly
>>cordless phone manufacturers do not state the output of their phones in
>>the specifications.
>>
>>... snip...
>>
>>Stowe School, the Buckinghamshire public school, also removed part of
>>its wireless network after a teacher became ill. Michael Bevington, a
>>classics teacher for 28 years at the school, said that he had such a
>>violent reaction to the network that he was too ill to teach.
>>
>>"I felt a steadily widening range of unpleasant effects whenever I was
>>in the classroom," he said. "First came a thick headache, then pains
>>throughout the body, sudden flushes, pressure behind the eyes, sudden
>>skin pains and burning sensations, along with bouts of nausea. Over the
>>weekend, away from the classroom, I felt completely normal."
>>
>>quoted from: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=592
>>
>>----
>>
>>see also: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?cat=29
>
>
> Those two non-scientific references tell the story--there is (AFAIK)
> no evidence that this is a problem. As to the 'teacher' story, it's
> easy to see what the *real* story is... <g> A teaching 'classics' for
> 28 years you have to believe he's a very computer oriented person who
> wanted computers in his classroom! (NOT!)

Here's a test to show how insignificant the radiation from a DECT or even
cell phone can be.

Get a large bowl of cold spaghetti (about the size of a human brain) and
whack it in the microwave oven for 5 minutes at high power.

Once done, dig into the middle of the spaghetti and you will find it is
cold, or at least much colder than the surrrounding spag.

That spaghetti has been bombarded by 850 watts of 2.4GHz RF and it still
didn't penetrate 7 or 8 centimeters deep into the spaghetti.

Now you can do the calculation to work out how much 1 watt, that's 1/850th
of the microwave power, will penetrate into the human brain with an 8mm
thick skull covering the grey matter.

HR