Do you think there is a health risk tied with the use of wireless radiation?

Do you think there is a health risk tied with the use of wireless radiation?
It's not ionized but on the other hand it's a type of radiation our body and system has never been exposed to before and we're soaked in it 24/7 now.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

We've been bombarded by these waves 24/7 for the last 100 years.

If it was bad, we'd have known by now

There has been radio broadcasts for 100 years with wide exposing but now people have wi-fi routers and gadgets in their own home.

>it's a type of radiation our body and system has never been exposed to before
Nope, pic related. Every day, the Sun bathes us in the full spectrum of radiation, and much or the radiation less energetic than UV rays gets through our atmosphere. That means that the only radiation that isn't commonplace to us is x-ray and gamma radiation. Our wi-fi sure as hell isn't using either of those. It operates between microwave and radio frequencies.

If you turn a radio or television to noise, you're actually picking up the low-energy radiation that's coming at us from in all directions. The difference between that and wi-fi is that the energy levels of wi-fi radiation is put in a specific order so it carries the information we tell it to.

b-but the source is much closer now and even at night

I swear I saw a paper somewhere pointing out that human head is a full or half a wavelength long for some commonly used frequency band, but I can't find it now.

The government can't let you keep any details about their mind control frequencies.

Wouldn't that be somewhat easy to calculate if you know about frequency and that the normal head is about 20 cm in diameter?

...

Yeah, but I'm lazy. Also, I don't remember if speed of light in tissues is significantly different than in vacuum for microwaves (it would be in infrared).

>Yeah, but I'm lazy
Too lazy to look up one fact and do one calculation?

Yeah. Too lazy. I can't do it because I don't want to.

>It's not ionized
Please don't form opinions about matters you are woefully ill equipped to assess.

Radiation is basically charged ions and ions with neutral charge, dipshit.

The water vapor in the atmosphere attenuates microwaves significantly, you can even see that in your graphic.
I did a lot of power calculations for a test I ran at work, if you use the conservative numbers it says that the closest you should put most WiFi devices to eyes and testicals is 37 cm (to prevent potential damage due to thermal effects).
Later I found the data sheet for the module we use says it should always be 20cm from the user.

>Radiation is basically charged ions
Bahahaha
>ions with neutral charge
You're cute.

Probably, yes. It isn't capable of breaking bonds (ionizing), as you said, but that's not the only relevant aspect. There are thermals to account for, and the effect of magnetic fields. At present devices are only regulated by SAR of a given tissue it's expected to be in proximity to, which isn't really even relevant, because for the most part, thermals aren't relevant. If one thing sticks here, I hope it's that thermals, are, not, the, only, thing, to, think about.

Anyway, present literature (both modern and dating back to US Navy experiments) says the following about microwave band radiation (whether GSM-900 or WiFi:
-Alters blood brain barrier permeability (could be used to get drugs into the brain, eg for chemotherapy)
-Interacts with voltage dependent calcium channels, negatively
-Elevates heat shock protein expression (non-thermal basis)
-Alters neurotransmitter levels in various brain regions, mostly serotonin and norepinephrine
-Causes elevated ROS and NOS production from aforementioned stress
-Certain cells are more vulnerable than others, especially in G2 phase
-Pyramidal cells, due to their location and size, are most affected. Younger children are probably most at risk, thinner skull, still undergoing corticogenesis, whatever.
-Possible misfolded proteins which must then be repaired or destroyed

Etc. There's more to say, but you get the picture. Also, anyone trying to say "we're bombarded by it from the sun every day" obviously doesn't understand basic atmospheric physics. Wireless stuff probably isn't too grand for reproductive organs, ie, germ line cells either.

I won't use it. But I've never cared for wireless beyond a radio anyway.

Keeping wireless devices at least 20-30 cm away from your body is a nice rule to keep in mind.

Thanks for the nightmare fuel, f@m.

Then there's this idiot. Next he's gonna say Wikipedia is wrong because anybody can edit it.

That says ionIZING, friend. Meaning, the radiation CREATES ions by fucking up atoms.

It does not mean that the radiation itself is an ion.

>Arguing about semantics to claim he was right all along

Better not keep my phone in my pocket, my leg will get burned!

>semantics
>cause is the same as effect

Anecdotally I notice it lowers the quality of my sleep.

I believe it's getting everyone bald.

Keep trying kid, you're hilarious.

So... Am I doing something when I turn on the "Aeroplane mode" of my phone at night?

Probably. You'd have to get a meter and test what it's actually doing to really know.

>Every day, the Sun bathes us in the full spectrum of radiation
user, I'm not sure you understood your image...

If the surface was exposed to anything other than a few muons here and there, life as we know would be very different, if it was at all.

How come? What type of effect do muons have on tissue? Are muons ionizing?
Tell us about muons.

Compare it with how other radiation works, eg, visible light. Photon is absorbed by particle. Electron energy states are quantized, an electron moves up an energy level, and then it re-emits a photon of slightly lower energy than it received, and returns to its original state.

More or less, with a muon the particle emits xrays. Which as you know, are ionizing.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon
How did Feynman put it... "It's as though God was just trying out a slightly different mass for the electron."

(I'm no expert on particle physics though, so some parts of that might be slightly off. But the overall explanation is correct. Muon collision spurs the emission of xrays.)