The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Are wireless headphones a health risk?  (Read 114878 times)

Offline Pumblechook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #25 on: 28/10/2008 19:00:56 »
In the early days of radio.. early 20th century ..Sr Marconi.  There was lots of fears about 'death rays'.  These subsided not to reappear until the 1990s with the mobile phone.
 

Offline blaze

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #26 on: 29/10/2008 00:09:23 »
RD, you're right - my electrosensitivity does involve Lyme Disease, but not in the way you are suggesting. These spirochetes have flagella, and I believe that I can feel them swimming towards the excessive levels of magnetite in my brain caused by all this electrosmog, trying to find their way back 'home'. This is why my lower teeth are all sawed down - I had to have a bite plate made in 2000 for this - long before I was aware of my Lyme and all of this electrosmog.

If this is a science forum and cause and effect have some kind of order, in order for your assumptions to be correct, I would have had to have been aware of and concerned about electrosmog prior to grinding my teeth down. In fact, though I've done this to my teeth since I was a kid (in my sleep), it wasn't until the wireless boom took off in the latter part of the 90's that I did any damage to them. In fact, now I often find myself clenching my teeth during the day when I am awake. It is not intentional either and requires my constant attention to keep from doing this. If I think of something else, my teeth automatically bite down as if I'm not even in control of my own jaw bone.

So you tell me how a psychiatrist is going to help me? Give me drugs to sedate me to the fact that I have a type of bacteria (or rather several) that are responsive to all of this electrosmog? Several are even types that live inside the iron-rich red blood cells. Sit me down in front of a counselor who is going to reassure me that all this electrosmog is safe and that this isn't what I am feeling?

Pumblechook, I measured the magnetic field in this house with a meter. It measures anywhere from about 1.5 to over 3 milligauss 24/7 (this is not considering the higher levels near appliances). My neighbor's house measures 4 to 12 milligauss or higher (again, away from appliances). I predicted her house would be higher because I often felt worse when I would visit with her, and once I turned white and almost collapsed upon entering.

Most other homes I've measured are much lower - maybe 0.5 to 1.5, with occasional areas that run higher (up to maybe 3 or 4). But my entire home is 1.5 to over 3 milligauss all day long everywhere away from appliances - and this is without considering the microwaves from area cell phone towers. My yard on one side is 3-4 milligauss, too.

I've even turned the circuit breaker off, and the magnetic field does not go away. The only time it goes away is if the power in this entire development goes out. That tells me that it must be coming from the ground wiring, so things like Stetzer filters wouldn't help. I'm also stuck in this home because I can't think of any job I can work that will not expose me to even higher levels, since most stores and office settings would expose me to fluorescent lighting and electronics of some type, and cell phone users and the masts that enable them now rule the planet. Even a couple of errands can virtually wipe me out some days if I hit enough cell phone users. Some stores I avoid like the plague, too - like Walmart - oh my God.

Bored chemist, years ago 1 in 30 people died of cancer - today 1 in 3 do. Autism, ADHD, Chronic Fatigue, early onset Alzheimer's, super bugs - nearly every disease is on the rise, and the best part is disease is no longer limited to the elderly - it's attacking much younger generations today.

With all the money that is being spent on research, what have they really cured? Sure, they've perfected surgery, but if it can't be surgically removed and/or replaced with a synthetic something, they haven't really cured anything - but they've sure convinced the vast majority of people that we're living longer.

In 1994 I bought my daughter a kitten - after one year he began to spray the corners of the house, though no cause was ever found for the behavior. I believe now that he began this habit because he sensed danger when a cell phone antenna went up in the neighborhood.
By 1996 he was dead anyway of fatty liver disease.

Got another kitten right afterwards in 1996 - by 1998 at the age of two he was dead of FIP - basically his immune system failed.

Got another kitten, again, right afterwards, and by the age of two his kidneys were shot.

Two of my cats died in my current home - heart attacks.

I should not think something of all of these deaths???
 

Offline blaze

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #27 on: 29/10/2008 00:21:22 »
Something else to consider, I lived in a home for 14 years that was found to have high levels of radon when I moved - I had to remediate it before the house sold.

Now correct me if I'm wrong here, but radon is 'radioactive gas' and I was breathing it for 14 years - in the presence of a cell phone tower which gave off radiofrequencies, so...???
 

Offline Pumblechook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #28 on: 29/10/2008 12:31:34 »
Radon gas is radioactive and at high levels can cause lung cancer but is it probably far less risky than smoking so I wouldn't worry. Low levels of radon actually have benefits and  can reduce the risk of cancer.   There is no connection with radio frequency transmissions.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8132
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #29 on: 29/10/2008 14:12:49 »
I often find myself clenching my teeth during the day when I am awake. It is not intentional either and requires my constant attention to keep from doing this. If I think of something else, my teeth automatically bite down as if I'm not even in control of my own jaw bone.

Stiffness or spasticity in jaw muscles his is entirely consistent with Lyme disease affecting cranial nerves which control your face.
Cranial neuritis could also explain your asymmetrical face symptom, (Bells palsy).

Quote
Lyme disease may have a latency period of months to years before symptoms of late infection emerge. Early signs include meningitis, encephalitis, cranial neuritis, and radiculoneuropathies. Later, encephalomyelitis and encephalopathy may occur. A broad range of psychiatric reactions have been associated with Lyme disease including paranoia, dementia, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, panic attacks, major depression, anorexia nervosa, and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/151/11/1571

If you read the above quote you will see that Lyme can cause OCD and paranoia.
EM fields are not necessary to explain your symptoms, Lyme alone can account for all of them, including your irrational belief that telephone & electric companies are responsible for exacerbating your symptoms and that there is a conspiracy to conceal their wrongdoing which includes the government: these are classic symptoms of paranoia. 
 

So you tell me how a psychiatrist is going to help me? Give me drugs to sedate me to the fact that I have a type of bacteria (or rather several) that are responsive to all of this electrosmog? Several are even types that live inside the iron-rich red blood cells. Sit me down in front of a counselor who is going to reassure me that all this electrosmog is safe and that this isn't what I am feeling?


Possible treatments for neuropsychiatric symptoms of Lyme disease would include...

1. Alternative antibiotic regime: different type(s) of antibiotic to reduce the parasite load.
2. non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication: inflammation triggered by the bacteria is what damages the nerves in spirochete infection like Lyme.
3. Anti-convulsant medication: this reduces the frequency and severity of short-circuiting in the damaged nervous system which is causing your neuropsychiatric symptoms.
4. Anti-psychotic medication to reduce paranoia.

I measured the magnetic field in this house with a meter. It measures anywhere from about 1.5 to over 3 milligauss 24/7 (this is not considering the higher levels near appliances). My neighbor's house measures 4 to 12 milligauss or higher (again, away from appliances). I predicted her house would be higher because I often felt worse when I would visit with her, and once I turned white and almost collapsed upon entering.

People with Lyme can have problems with thermoregulation and can be intolerant of heat or cold : if your neighbours house is unusually hot or cold this could explain why you felt worse soon after entering. You previously mentioned that you felt unwell when the heater in your car came on, again heat intolerance caused by Lyme could explain this, not EM fields.

Again I would suggest you seek out a neurologist or psychiatrist who has experience of treating the neuropsychiatric symptoms of Lyme disease. The links I gave previously may help you find such a physician.
« Last Edit: 29/10/2008 14:29:04 by RD »
 

Offline Pumblechook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #30 on: 29/10/2008 14:24:33 »
A few milligauss is a tiny field.   The Earth's magnetic field is 500 mG.  (Half a Gauss).  The magnet in the speaker in your TV or radio is maybe 2000 Gauss.

How much have you spent on  meters?
 

Offline blaze

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #31 on: 29/10/2008 15:02:22 »
Radon gas is radioactive and at high levels can cause lung cancer but is it probably far less risky than smoking so I wouldn't worry.

Where is your 'proof' that smoking is more risky than radon with regards to lung cancer? Let's start there.

Then show me your proof that cigarette smoking (alone) causes lung cancer. It's never been proven. Never. It's one of those bold scientific assumptions where circumstantial evidence is accepted as proof.

My mom developed lung cancer 5 years after she quit (late 90's), shortly after the wireless boom took off.

So my assertion is that smoking in and of itself does not cause lung cancer, but smoking in the presence of electromagnetic/microwave/radiowave radiation certainly could, but then again so would breathing in any type of pollution regularly in the presence of this radiation - so can we really just shake our finger at those cigarettes and claim to be unbiased scientists?

Here's an article from 1956. I'm choosing this article because it suggests that cigarette smoking is likely a risk factor to lung cancer, yet it implies that there might be some other exposure to some unknown something (or somethings) that might be a cofactor in the disease. I suggest you read this with EMF/RF exposure in mind, because it fits quite nicely. This might explain why lung cancer rates continue to increase, yet the number of smokers continues to decline.

I'm curious as to what will you blame when all smokers have essentially committed suicide, yet lung cancer remains?

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/smoking/cameronf.htm

...Most authorities on the subject agree that before the early years of the twentieth century, cancer of the lung was encountered rarely. In a monograph on lung cancer which was notable in its day--1912--Adler could base his review on a mere 374 cases. Today cancer of the lung takes the lives of about as many white males each year as were reported to have died of all forms of cancer combined in 1900. During the period 1930-1948, the death rate from lung cancer among men rose from 5.3 per 100,000 to 27.1--an increase of 411 per cent. Some part of this remarkable increase can be laid to better and more widely available diagnosis, but the net impact of the factor of better diagnosis is considerably weakened by noting the trends in the post-mortem experience in large hospitals over the years. Cancer of the lung was perhaps less generally recognizable forty or fifty years ago than it is today--but that was hardly true in the autopsy room. Cancer of the lung now constitutes a substantially larger proportion of the total autopsy findings than it did thirty years ago.

There are certain curious features of this increase. In the first place, whereas the curve of the death rate from nearly every type of cancer affecting chiefly adults rises steadily with increasing age, that for cancer of the lung does not. As early as 1936 the rates by age for white males showed a flattened peak between the ages of 60 and 75, after which it fell off. The peak has since become high and sharp, and for the years 1945-1948 occurs at about the ages 65 to 70, after which the rates drop abruptly. The rate curves for women show later peak death rates, tending to resemble more closely the curves for other types of cancer. The only reasonable explanation for this phenomenon is as follows: From what is known about established environmental causes of human cancer, those causes appear to require years of operation, usually not less than twenty, but sometimes longer, in order to exert their effect. The lung cancer death rate curve suggests that whatever agent (or agents) is responsible for the present increase in cancer of the lung is of recent appearance in terms of its current prevalence, did not involve men who are now beyond the age of 70, but did involve men who are 65 to 70, and in the light of the usual exposure period necessary to produce cancer, about twenty to thirty years ago. This puts the critical exposure period in the 1920s and early 1930s, when the present susceptibles were relatively young men.

The second unique feature of lung cancer death rates over the years is the growing disparity between the sexes. In the period 1933-1936, the ratio was slightly over two male deaths to one female death from this disease. In the interval 1945-1948, five men died from lung cancer for every woman dying from the same cause. In 1949 the difference had increased to six to one, and today most opinions put the male-female ratio of deaths at eight or nine to one. It would appear that more men than women have exposed themselves to whatever factors are responsible for the recent rise of this disease.

Thirdly, cancer of the lung is commoner by a factor of more than 2 among white males living in cities than it is among country dwellers. The differences are much less marked for women, but are nonetheless discernible...

I spent none of my own money on meters - my ex-husband bought me one.

RD, are you a doctor?

And it was the dead of winter when I almost collapsed upon entering my neighbor's home.

And I did not say I felt worse when the heater in my car came on - I said I felt worse as soon as the engine came on - there's a big difference between the two.

Also, I said I felt worst the more the heat would run in my home, but I kept my thermostat at no more than 68 degrees, which is actually quite chilly to some. I did not feel any effect from the unit during the summertime simply because I'd been avoiding running it!

Finally, you vacillate back and forth here - telling me my symptoms are either valid and an offshoot of Lyme, yet in the same breath you suggest I see a psychiatrist. If these symptoms are truly related to these infections of my nervous system, how would a psychiatrist be able to help me? - your only suggestion should be antibiotics to treat the infection, not a shrink or psych meds.

But you still avoid the real issue here - if these fields are promoting my infections, can you scientifically blame my infection for my symptoms? - let alone suggest that they are an offshoot of underlying phobias?

I'll say it again - my symptoms of electrosensitivity PRECEDED my knowledge of EMF/RF. I had no knowledge prior of what an electromagnetic field even was.
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #32 on: 29/10/2008 16:23:48 »
And I did not say I felt worse when the heater in my car came on - I said I felt worse as soon as the engine came on - there's a big difference between the two.
Anyone know how much EM radiation an internal combustion engine produces?

Quote
Finally, you vacillate back and forth here - telling me my symptoms are either valid and an offshoot of Lyme, yet in the same breath you suggest I see a psychiatrist. If these symptoms are truly related to these infections of my nervous system, how would a psychiatrist be able to help me? - your only suggestion should be antibiotics to treat the infection, not a shrink or psych meds.

I'll say it again - my symptoms of electrosensitivity PRECEDED my knowledge of EMF/RF. I had no knowledge prior of what an electromagnetic field even was.

Well, RD is saying your symptoms are a result of the Lyme, but that you now attribute them to EM fields - so the symptoms would have come before any knowledge of EM fields.  Plus, what he actually said was:

Quote
Again I would suggest you seek out a neurologist or psychiatrist who has experience of treating the neuropsychiatric symptoms of Lyme disease.

So he didn't just tell you to see a psychiatrist, and this doesn't contradict his comments about your symptoms being Lyme-related.

As it happens, I'm wary of any forum-based diagnosis, but have you ever seen anyone about the neuropsychiatric effects of Lyme disease?  I know I would, in your situation.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8132
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #33 on: 29/10/2008 19:27:21 »
And it was the dead of winter when I almost collapsed upon entering my neighbor's home.

Going from a winter outdoor temperature to a warm house would be sufficient to upset a heat intolerant person.


I did not say I felt worse when the heater in my car came on  
I kept telling family members that I always felt ill, but especially so when I'd drive my car, or when I'd get to a certain intersection or road, or in certain stores, or when my heater ran more..

BTW vertigo can be a Lyme symptom, (cranial nerve viii), if you were affected turning your head from side-to-side at an intersection could cause dizziness and nausea.


Finally, you vacillate back and forth here - telling me my symptoms are either valid and an offshoot of Lyme, yet in the same breath you suggest I see a psychiatrist. If these symptoms are truly related to these infections of my nervous system, how would a psychiatrist be able to help me? - your only suggestion should be antibiotics to treat the infection, not a shrink or psych meds.

No “either” in my statements. Psychiatrists treat hardware and software problems. The neuropsychiatic consequences of Lyme would be a hardware problem: mental disorder occurring as a consequence inflammation of the brain caused by bacterial infection. So a psychiatrist (or neurologist) who has experience in treating Lyme disease could prescribe alternative antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, anti-convulsants and anti-psychotics, (the latter three medications can provide relief of symptoms, but not cure).


I'll say it again - my symptoms of electrosensitivity PRECEDED my knowledge of EMF/RF. I had no knowledge prior of what an electromagnetic field even was.

Yes your symptoms of Lyme disease pre-existed your Lyme diagnosis and your interest in EM fields, but this chronology does not support your hypothesis that EM fields are to blame for your illness. You have acknowledged that your previous hypothesis that chemicals in cosmetics were exacerbating your symptoms was incorrect. Your EM field theory is equally incorrect. Lyme disease alone can explain all of your symptoms, please see a physician who specializes in treating this rare condition. (The links I have posted may help you find one).
« Last Edit: 29/10/2008 19:47:34 by RD »
 

Offline turnipsock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • Beekeeper to the unsuspecting
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #34 on: 29/10/2008 22:48:35 »
A quick reallity check here.



One consequence of the proposition "electric fields are bad for you" is that we would have lived longer before these fields were produced.

200 years ago there was no electricity (in the conventional sense of the word).

There is good evidence from the records kept in parish registries etc that people are generally living longer than say 200 years ago. In particular fewer children are dying young.


Good point.

50% of road deaths occur in 30 mph zones but only 12% of road deaths occur on motorways...therefore, the faster you go the less likley you are to die.

I use my wireless headphones all the time and the only problem I have had is not hearing my mum shouting when she hadn't locked the toilet door.

My best friend died this year from a brain tumour, he was into mobile phones from the begining and was always on the phone. The tumour was on the same side the used for his phone.
 

Offline blaze

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #35 on: 30/10/2008 00:16:10 »
I spent 15 years on a variety of psych meds, and the only one that ever consistently helped any of my symptoms was Klonopin, which consequently, is an anticonvulsant - and towards the end there, even that one failed. Interestingly enough, fluorescent lights, which emit EMF, are known to cause seizures in some - so was the Klonopin really treating my anxiety or just some underlying seizure disorder brought on by exposure to these fields?

Klonopin only helped when my symptoms were limited to anxiety, too. Once I started experiencing sweat attacks, heat (and cold) intolerance, droopy eyelids, severe insomnia, etc... - even that one failed. I don't think it's unscientific at all for me, therefore, to suggest that EMF/RF exposure is involved, given the timeline, even if its involvement has to do with its ability to encourage Lyme.

I have to say that I find it interesting that there is a definite parallel and overlap between the symptoms of electrosensitivity and that of chronic Lyme. Are they one in the same? I've tried to tell those on Lyme forums that they are truly electrosensitive and those on EMF forums that they could be harboring chronic Lyme, yet neither side wishes to take me seriously, even though I've made the connection between the two and even measured my exposures. Each side believes in their own cause, not realizing that they are likely related.

And one theory I have - which turnipsock reminded me of - is that it is possible I become more symptomatic at intersections, waiting for the light to turn green, because I am not moving. Microwave ovens today are often made to include rotating turntables so that the food cooks evenly. So he may be right that you are less likely to die if you are moving fast, especially when you're surrounded by towers. This might also explain why I have such an increase in my symptoms when I am sleeping - or attempting to, I should say.

Turnipsock, how old was your friend? And was it a glioma? My ex survived, but he continues to use a phone - I believe he uses a headset now, but I don't believe they are much better.

You might be interested in this, too - pictures of what a cell looks like when exposed to these frequencies...

Generation X-ray (scroll to pics):

http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20080508.htm
« Last Edit: 30/10/2008 01:13:27 by blaze »
 

Offline Neuroengineer

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #36 on: 03/06/2009 21:56:22 »
I read a lot of your posts, but not all, simply it's too long.

The main debate here I guess is, "Is electromagnetic radiation hazardous to your health?". I was actually searching for a completely different topic when I stumbled on this post.

First I'd like to say, unless you have formal training in Electricity and Magnetism, Electrodynamics and Neurobiology, it will be very hard for you to fully understand the problem, let alone give a sensible answer.

I am in the Neural Engineering program at Penn State and recently attended a seminar on high tension EM radiation and its influence on the brain. Similar to what you all are discussing. The conclusion from this talk was simply, "no harmful evidence".

Here's a brief explanation on EM radiation and matter:

What doesn't get absorbed by matter, goes through (hence a SAR index).
Higher frequencies of EM radiation have more energy and produce more damage to tissue when absorbed.
The power is important. Low power = low risk.
Certain frequencies will not penetrate far (they are absorbed or scattered) in tissue.
Antennas will only couple with wavelengths comparable to their length.


Brief explanation of neurons:

Neurons have a maximum firing rate based on their recovery time (order of milliseconds).
Neurons can be treated as mini-antennas due to their pole-like nature and excitability.


So to sum it up, say a neuron with axon is on the order of a micron = 10^-6 meters. To directly excite those neurons you need radiation of a similar wavelength or a frequency of about 3x10^14 Hz, maybe even 10^12 Hz = 1 THz is possible. This is far higher frequency than microwaves in cell phones.

As for "science", science is based on evidence. Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but it is not a fact. The best example I can think of is the "aether" and Michelson-Morley experiment.

This person who "feels" EM radiation of high frequency might be unique, but science doesn't draw conclusions based on single data points.

The experiments we are doing in the lab use certain frequencies to control brain function with wire leads stuck in the brain, but these are low frequency and localized.

Important question: The person who claims their eye 'droops' with the hairdryer, it is the same side (ipsilateral) eye as the hairdryer? The motor cortex is very complex and areas that control certain muscles are very closely crammed in a small strip of tissue that covers the brain from left to right. Furthermore, I would think that as nerves are cross innervated in the brain, moving the EM source to your LEFT side should cause a motor response on your RIGHT side. Also, the firing rate of neurons upon motor control is broad, 60 Hz which is the line frequency in the USA is a small line in this band. I am not saying that this is your imagination, but it could be psychosomatic. Especially if you are holding the hairdryer with your same-side hand.

In my professional opinion, I don't believe you can "feel" EM radiation other than what everyone else feels, despite what some people might say. Furthermore, if you don't absorb radiation, it can't hurt you because it passes through. (Coupling with an antenna causes a drop in power so this is considered absorption).

Hope this gives some insight.

GB
« Last Edit: 03/06/2009 22:51:13 by Neuroengineer »
 

Offline k8

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #37 on: 11/06/2014 07:48:04 »
I'm surprised that this persons experiences have been dismissed out of hand. Has no-one here heard of empirical evidence?

I would say the burden of proof would be with the company with the money to conduct trials, rather than someone experiencing symptoms.

Any educated or generally logical person, would say that we do not know for sure either way at this stage.

I have some sensitivity, so maybe I am more open minded. Mine is only mild discomfort when cells phones are turned on, unless I switch the sim card round. Many a time I have accidentally created a 'blind' experiment. e.g. not realising the phone was turned on, it was supposed to be off, feeling mild discomfort and finding it was on. I even often can feel it at most sensitivity when it is turned off, unless I take the Sim card out.
So, while it is only when pretty close to me, and is only mild discomfort, i do take the sim card out unless I really need it to minimise impact.

This is clearly not a nocebo, as, with my current knowledge of phones, it doesn't make sense why it occurs when it is switched off, and occurs when I don't realise the phone is switched on, but feel it. I wish it was just a nocebo.

Even if this persons is a nocebo, it is still partly causing it btw, as the symptoms are still happening! It wouldn't suprise me if it wasn't. I do know of someone else with a brain tumour in area where mobile phone was held (a lot). It's enough to at least question whether it could.

So, even though i'm not sensitive to wireless (as far as i know) with wireless headphones, some people experiences and studies, I'd be suspicious, and consider how important it is to have wireless headphones,  but couldn't say either way at this stage.

I do not appear to be sensitive to wireless, but that doesn't mean others are not
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #38 on: 11/06/2014 22:48:09 »
Wow, zombie thread resurrected after 5 years...

There's been a lot of research on these issues (from power lines, to phone & wi-fi towers, to mobile phones, to home wiring, etc.), and the results of the properly blinded studies have generally been inconclusive - i.e. no evidence of measurable health effects from EM radiation. As is often the case in controversial issues of this kind, studies by vested interests on either side will tend to support their views (biases may occur, or studies with the 'wrong' results may not be published, etc.), so you have to try and find independent, good quality studies.
 
Modern phone systems are far more efficient and transmit with much lower energy than early ones. It can't be discounted that someone with an old phone glued to their ear for many years in an area of poor cell coverage (when phone transmit power is boosted) might have some related health effect in the long term, but at present such a risk has not been seen in the statistics - people use phones and people get sick, but there's no significant correlation apparent. It seems to me that if there is such a risk, it is small enough to be swamped in the random noise of the everyday risks of living for many years, so there are far more significant everyday risks to worry about.

For a good double-blinded trial on electro-sensitivity, see this from the University of Essex, UK which concludes that whatever is causing the symptoms of the people they tested who claimed to be electro-sensitive, it's not short-term rf-emf exposure from mobile phone technology; although the subjects reported worse symptoms when they knew the transmitters were on, under blinded conditions they couldn't tell the difference. Ben Goldacre talks about the study and the response to it in his blog 'Bad Science'. It's research and comment from 2007, so predates this thread... The wikipedia article is more recent and comprehensive.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Are wireless headphones a health risk?
« Reply #38 on: 11/06/2014 22:48:09 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums