[CliveG]

Your suggestion would work if I constantly wore clothing (including a beanie) that blocked radiation and had the recording device inside the clothing. I would have to have another set of clothing that did not block the radiation and that I could not tell the difference. Then I would have to visit my home every third day and stay outside for a few hours. Someone would have to randomly chose the two sets of clothing and give them to me. In this test it would be easy for me to cheat. I would be able to tell which set was which because I was not being monitored.

[CliveG]

(snip)
I also think you should answer my questions.

Too much like hard work to sort out and do another put down. It is not because you think you have "got me". We have moved on. Life can sometimes be disappointing.

[alancalverd]

I understand entirely how to conduct a blind trial. It is entirely up to you whether you want to or not, but nobody with an ounce of scientific integrity will take you seriously if you don't.

[CliveG]

I understand entirely how to conduct a blind trial. It is entirely up to you whether you want to or not, but nobody with an ounce of scientific integrity will take you seriously if you don't.

I also understand entirely.

Please critique what I have proposed based on what you now understand the issues to be.

Thanks

[alancalverd]

The only valid blind experiment is for you to go about your daily life, preferably carrying a portable monitor that records but does not display whatever you think is the cause, and record your symptoms in a diary. Nothing more, nothing less. You do not use any special shielding or tell anyone else what you are doing, where, or when. You may not have access to any information about your exposure,  or your proximity to any hidden source (you will obviously be aware of visible sources), at any time during the test. One of your trusted scientists (could be a sworn lawyer, if the instructions are explicit) will then unseal the recorder and immediately "publish" its readings whilst another publishes your symptom diary. By "publish" I mean circulate by timed email to several independent adjudicators - I'm happy to be one, as I am sure will BC, and we might rope in other known scientists and medics through this website. The adjudicators then investigate any apparent correlation between claimed cause and observed effect.

The problem with all blinded experiments on live humans is ensuring that the subject really doesn't know whether or when he is being exposed to the stimulus. The worry here is that we know you have a few monitors of your own, so you might need a witness, but we have statistical processes for discovering such cases too.

[CliveG]

The only valid blind experiment is for you to go about your daily life, preferably carrying a portable monitor that records but does not display whatever you think is the cause, and record your symptoms in a diary. Nothing more, nothing less. You do not use any special shielding or tell anyone else what you are doing, where, or when. You may not have access to any information about your exposure,  or your proximity to any hidden source (you will obviously be aware of visible sources), at any time during the test. One of your trusted scientists (could be a sworn lawyer, if the instructions are explicit) will then unseal the recorder and immediately "publish" its readings whilst another publishes your symptom diary. By "publish" I mean circulate by timed email to several independent adjudicators - I'm happy to be one, as I am sure will BC, and we might rope in other known scientists and medics through this website. The adjudicators then investigate any apparent correlation between claimed cause and observed effect.

The problem with all blinded experiments on live humans is ensuring that the subject really doesn't know whether or when he is being exposed to the stimulus. The worry here is that we know you have a few monitors of your own, so you might need a witness, but we have statistical processes for discovering such cases too.

I am struggling to understand why you do not comprehend that if I shield myself when I go home, which I do, and if I do not go into the high radiation areas, which I make every effort not to do, then I do not experience any ill-effects.

Do you want me to make an effort to go out of my way to take time in high radiation areas without shielding? That would not be what I call "a normal day".

Are you trying to have me perform an experiment that is set-up to fail?

In my experimental set-up, the two outer boxes can be labelled A and B (under a flap) so the experimenters only know the letter of the box and not which box is a shielding box. Observers (witesses) would not see the labels so they would not know whether A or B was being used. I would hand in sealed envelope with the test number as to which test I deem I am exposed to radiation - with the reasons why. The experimenter would hand in a similar envelope with the test number and paper with either A or B according to the outer box used. This means I have to spend the full 3 hours in the box. I am not prepared to do that.

An hour an a half is enough time. I would have to endure a headache for possibly an hour. Okay I figured out how to get around that. I have a head shield with me in the box and can use it when I need it. And take it off before I am let out. I would have to pump some air into the box while I am in there. No problem.

After 10 trials, there are 10 envelopes. The A and B boxes are then checked to see which one does shielding. That way, if A is the shielded and I match the shielding vs non-shielding in all 10 cases, I think I have made my point (and proof). This is a double bind where neither the subject nor the experimenter know which box is being used.

The boxes would be MDF fiber board and can be made to look indistinguishable with careful assembly. Some-one would mix them around after each test so that observers do not know if a box is being re-used - not really needed but an added precaution. Or put in a tent. The lining would be in the inside of the outer boxes, and then painted so one cannot see which is which is one glimpses the inner part. I would sit with just a pair of shorts. Simple cloth shorts provided by the experimenter. That way I would not have any gadget on me to tell me if there is radiation or not.

Thank you helping me (in an indirect way) improve my experiment.

If it works then maybe some people may be prepared to sponsor a proper experiment in a lab with different pulsing modulation. I know I will be harming myself by taking part but what the heck. I am old and damaged already.

[alancalverd]

The question is whether an absence of shielding or the presence of radiation is causing the symptoms. Whatever you believe to be the case, anybody with an ounce of understanding of human behaviour will need to see a demonstration that excludes your knowledge and judgement.

No experiment is ever set up to fail. That would be a waste of time. The experiment I suggest is to demonstrate the correlation between your symptoms and your exposure to a stimulus whose presence and intensity you do not know. That would be conclusive and interesting.

Your suggestion is pretty neat but more complicated than necessary. You could simply tell us what intensity of which radiation triggers which symptoms in your experience, then sit in an unshielded box and tell us when the radiation source is switched on. It's a valid single-blind that can be extended to any number of people and any type of radiation. If you like, you could use existing commercial sources like mobile phone masts, by being driven around blindfolded then sitting in a blacked-out trailer (not sure about the SA regulations, but you can't carry passengers in a moving trailer in the UK). But it would be neater to use a laboratory with a controllable transmitter.

[Bored chemist]

Too much like hard work to sort out

But answering  points is part of discussion.
Why are you on a discussion board if you don't want to follow the rules?

"5.Keep it a discussion

The site is for asking or answering questions, or general discussion.
"
from
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0

[Bored chemist]

nobody with an ounce of scientific integrity will take you seriously if you don't.

I think that ship may have already sailed.

[CliveG]

Re: Does mobile phone tower radiation pose health problems?
« Reply #406 on: Yesterday at 15:06:51 »
The question is whether an absence of shielding or the presence of radiation is causing the symptoms. Whatever you believe to be the case, anybody with an ounce of understanding of human behaviour will need to see a demonstration that excludes your knowledge and judgement.

Do you not see that absence of shielding and presence of radiation are one and the same thing? I only wear shielding when near the tower.

If I am near the mast and not in the shield house and not wearing shielding and exposed for more than an hour I get symptoms. You say that under those conditions I may be affected by a placebo effect where I expect symptoms. I have said that some of those condition occurred and I was not aware of them. Only when I got the symptoms did I review my movements and the times spent and discovered that I was wrong in estimating the length of time or in thinking I was out of the radiation.

But I get what you are saying. I have to conduct a blind (or double blind) experiment to eliminate any possible knowledge - subconscious or not - and also have a neutral observer.

[CliveG]

No experiment is ever set up to fail. That would be a waste of time. The experiment I suggest is to demonstrate the correlation between your symptoms and your exposure to a stimulus whose presence and intensity you do not know. That would be conclusive and interesting.

Of course experiments are set up to fail. Hundreds of them - paid for by the industry. One can read the set-up and know the result - no harm detected. On could say it is not a failure because it gives the industry the result they paid for.

[CliveG]

Your suggestion is pretty neat but more complicated than necessary. You could simply tell us what intensity of which radiation triggers which symptoms in your experience, then sit in an unshielded box and tell us when the radiation source is switched on. It's a valid single-blind that can be extended to any number of people and any type of radiation. If you like, you could use existing commercial sources like mobile phone masts, by being driven around blindfolded then sitting in a blacked-out trailer (not sure about the SA regulations, but you can't carry passengers in a moving trailer in the UK). But it would be neater to use a laboratory with a controllable transmitter.

I have told you the intensities. 3,000 uW/sqm gives me a pain in my side within 10 minutes. 2,000 gives me a headache within 2 hours. 600 will sometimes give me a headache within 30 minutes if walking around in it - possibly due to the standing waves within a house giving severe peaks. 3,000 will give me stomach pains in lying prone in it for more than 2 hours - followed by mild loose stool. A day of walking in and out 3,000 to 300 will give me stomach pains and diarrhea. Sleeping in 50 will disturb my sleep and I will wake tired. 50 will also wake my wife at times with her muscles vibrating depending on the pulsing

Read my posts a bit more carefully and tell me how I arrange to switch the tower radiation off and then on.

The laboratories have problems simulating the radiation for the masts which have multiple transmitters at various frequencies and changing the power levels (pulsing) with the phone connections. It can be done but it is not easy. They also would have problems simulating the reflections and standing waves from walls and other objects.

I can ride in a caravan, which is also illegal here but who is going to know, and be taken to various sites so I do not know if I am parked at an active site or not. Many caravans are aluminium so that would be a problem. I could be put on a wheeled platform in a box and wheeled around our property but I would pretty much know where I was. Or on a trailer with a box - even more illegal - but hey science can be risky. The back of a pickup truck would work. They ahve to park outside the mast and they will be approached by the security companies if no prior arrangement is made first.

You are not reading or comprehending my posts.
A) You cannot extend it to any type of radiation. Living cells are disrupted by certain pulsing frequencies. The carrier frequency no doubt plays a part also. We could do a whole lot of experiments on people to determine the parameters but experiments on people that have the possibility of harm are illegal (last time I checked).
B) You cannot extend to any person. Different people have different sensitivities. I am much more sensitive than my wife because of pre-existing conditions. People can be made sensitive by prolonged exposure - months in 300 to 3,000 uW/sqm. Since that definitely causes permanent damage and possibly cancer it is illegal.

So my suggested double box, double blind still seems the best. I do thank you again for your contributions. It also gives me an idea of the opposition I will face.

[CliveG]

Too much like hard work to sort out

But answering  points is part of discussion.
Why are you on a discussion board if you don't want to follow the rules?

"5.Keep it a discussion

The site is for asking or answering questions, or general discussion.
"
from
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0

Sigh once again. Please repeat the question(s) you want answered. You know which they are. I am confused and do not.

[Bored chemist]

Too much like hard work to sort out

But answering  points is part of discussion.
Why are you on a discussion board if you don't want to follow the rules?

"5.Keep it a discussion

The site is for asking or answering questions, or general discussion.
"
from
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0

Sigh once again. Please repeat the question(s) you want answered. You know which they are. I am confused and do not.

Can't you read, or can't you count?
It's the questions I asked repeatedly.

I am suggesting (based on extrapolations and interpretation of cellular studies) that one OTHER factor might be cell radiation causing a child to become predisposed to a febrile seizure. Simply put. No radiation - no seizure.

Febrile seizures were well documented before there were any  artificial sources of EM radiation (unless you count candles)
So you are plainly wrong.

Who is the one with no logical sense?

The one who didn't realist that the effect can not precede the existence of the cause. That would be you in this case.

Did you read through your post and thinking about how easy it would be for someone like me to point out the error?
If so, how did you miss it?
If not, why not? - do you like being shown for a fool?

[alancalverd]

The laboratories have problems simulating the radiation for the masts which have multiple transmitters at various frequencies and changing the power levels (pulsing) with the phone connections.

No problem. In fact, it resolves an interesting issue. We'll use a spectrum analyser and correlate everything coming into the box, with your symptoms.

The whole point of a blind experiment is that you don't know the inputs, so you certainly can't be allowed to control them. The joy of using a real mast is that the input will be reasonably random.

[CliveG]

The laboratories have problems simulating the radiation for the masts which have multiple transmitters at various frequencies and changing the power levels (pulsing) with the phone connections.

No problem. In fact, it resolves an interesting issue. We'll use a spectrum analyser and correlate everything coming into the box, with your symptoms.

The whole point of a blind experiment is that you don't know the inputs, so you certainly can't be allowed to control them. The joy of using a real mast is that the input will be reasonably random.

We? Are you coming to Joburg to do the test? With your equipment? Or are you with me in spirit? 

I was hoping to get the university guy to do a test of the spectrum and the power pulsations. On almost needs multiple receivers tuned to each incoming frequency and plot each power graph simultaneously, or do one frequency at a time.

"joy of using a real mast" - fine when you are not the guinea pig under test.

[CliveG]

This one?

Febrile seizures were well documented before there were any  artificial sources of EM radiation (unless you count candles)

I answered it.

Or this one?
Did you read through your post and thinking about how easy it would be for someone like me to point out the error?
If so, how did you miss it?
If not, why not? - do you like being shown for a fool?

No I did not. I do not know. I do not know. No I don't.

Happy now?

Now a similar question for you. An easy one for you. What is the answer to this?    ∂∑∞∫∀∅

[alancalverd]

With you in spirit, good buddy, and possibly Skype if the experiment progresses. If it turns out to be really interesting, maybe a trip to SA is called for. Happy to chat with the university guy, whoever. An RF spectrometer should at least give you the relative intensities of everything, and a power meter will give you the absolute total, so you can work out the action spectrum from both records.

[CliveG]

With you in spirit, good buddy, and possibly Skype if the experiment progresses. If it turns out to be really interesting, maybe a trip to SA is called for. Happy to chat with the university guy, whoever. An RF spectrometer should at least give you the relative intensities of everything, and a power meter will give you the absolute total, so you can work out the action spectrum from both records.

Thanks. As I said before, I worked with RF emissions and tests so I know my way around the instrumentation.

I will do a simple first trial which is to sit in the radiation without a box and only the meter. Then see how long it takes for the headache, and how intense it gets with time. I will record the results. Maybe do it twice.

[alancalverd]

Waste of time. If you look at the meter you will get sick.