Hybrids and electric cars- health risks from EMF's??

[RobertSmalls]

As I said earlier, I've read Mr. Collins' complaint on other web sites, and a quick Googling reveals it's been discussed at length, many times, at InsightCentral. The following is Honda's reply to Mr. Collins' complaint:



Basically, Honda feels the trifield meter in question is inappropriate for the high-frequency EMF of the Insight. Using more sophisticated test equipment, they measured the EM levels to be "within the same ranges as standard passenger vehicles equipped with high-energy ignition systems", which certainly explains why Mr. Collins came up with similar readings in an Odyssey.

Honda's response, plus the same readings in the Odyssey, plus the lack of any complaints not originating from Brian Collins, plus the complete enclosure of all IMA components in Faraday cages, have set my mind at rest on the issue of whether the Insight is any less safe (electrically) than any randomly chosen car on the road.

Blueflame, if you don't even use a microwave oven, I'd strongly encourage you to take action on your concerns. Determine exactly what types of EM radiation at what frequencies you are willing to be exposed to and for how long, purchase equipment capable of measuring it and rated for use in human safety applications, and take action to bring said radiation down to acceptable levels. If this means you buy 2m long spark plug wires and relocate the ignition coils as far away as you can, so be it. Who knows, maybe you'll find that lining your bedroom with this will reduce your risk of cancer, or that your microwave oven is actually acceptable.

I find the subject of RF mitigation interesting in its own right, and I do not intend to mock people who hold views at either extreme.

[bwilson4web]

Originally Posted by blueflame

. . . looking for confirmation or denial of the meter readings found on a Generation 1 Honda Insight.
. . .

Gauss meters on Ebay include:

$750 - FW Bell 5180 Hall Effect Gauss/Tesla Meter
$599.98 - NEW AC/DC Tesla Gauss Digitial Magnetic Flux Meter
$490.00 - DC Gauss Meter
$460.00 - DC/AC Gaussmeter Model GM2
$350.00 - Model 5170 Gauss/Tesla meter
$345.00 - AC DC 2000mT Tesla gauss
$344.55 - Teslameter Gaussmeter Digital
$299.99 - Bell 4048
. . .

The first step is to buy a gauss meter. This allows measurement of local fields including test vehicles. If you really are concerned about magnetic and electric fields, the first step is to get your own meter. Then use your meter to measure your local fields and the car (if it is still for sale.) But I find it hard to believe someone is serious if they do not own or use their own Gauss meter.

How hard can it be?

Bob Wilson

[blueflame]

Originally Posted by Christ

Blueflame - Even if you buy the thing, and you got a great deal on it, you could turn around and sell it rather quickly if you decided that it wasn't for you, for the same price or even more than you bought it for.

There is just no real sense in passing up a deal without proof that it could be something harmful, especially when you stand to make your money back easily if it turns out to be something not cool for you.

Thats the rub here. Normally I would say the same. But this aint a good price and selling for more may not be an option, depending on final sale price. Then there is all the time spent familiarizing oneself with a radically different car, only not to keep it

In NZ we dont have the same range of instrumentation. The cost is normally more than I pay for a whole car. My current ride cost $350US and its in good shape and gets 55mpg.

I incorrectly assumed someone would have measured one already, and real world ecommodder results were on tap.

If I buy it(its too expensive atm) I will definitely buy a meter and compare with other vehicles.

The guy selling it bought it at the auctions for much less only 2 months ago. Rats.

Thanks for all the good ideas and comments.

[jamesqf]

You know, this really puzzles me. Here you have people worried about the remote possibility of health hazards from EMFs, even though there are plenty of studies showing that if there's any effect at all, it's undetectably small. At the same time, they're apparently not the least little bit bothered by the fact that they're sitting just a few feet from a tank full of a poisonous and highly flammable chemical, which they must refill at frequent intervals, exposing themselves to this extremely hazardous substance while potentially allowing substantial amounts of it to be released into the environment...

[blueflame]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

You know, this really puzzles me. Here you have people worried about the remote possibility of health hazards from EMFs, even though there are plenty of studies showing that if there's any effect at all, it's undetectably small. At the same time, they're apparently not the least little bit bothered by the fact that they're sitting just a few feet from a tank full of a poisonous and highly flammable chemical, which they must refill at frequent intervals, exposing themselves to this extremely hazardous substance while potentially allowing substantial amounts of it to be released into the environment...

I think the above statement is untrue. And its a faulty syllogism

Fuel hermetically sealed from me in double auto skins, doesnt worry me. And it shouldnt. Unsealed in my home and I'd be freaken. I dont walk/cycle main roads. My heart sinks when I see kids walk to school along main roads during rush hour traffic. I wear a gas mask on my scooter. No ****. I only drive traffic with car windows up, vents closed, and a/c in summer. Only opening windows when clean air is possible. I drive a lot. My exposure to exhaust gases in minimal. I seek to do the same with EMF's.

As of 2007, 76% of Euros think that cell phones are harmful. They could all be a bunch of drongoes in Europe, but I dont think so

Health problems from EMF pollution are well documented. It is just in its infancy, and you will get the knockers like those who say 'my dad smoked all his life and lived till 90!'.

Health problems from exposure to petrochemicals is well documented. 13% of people in the USA die from respiratory ailments. Few people worry about their lungs. And exposure to dusts and fumes needs better policing. Thats my thing, cause it made me sick some years back.

Some animal farmers have stock deaths beyond their neighbors with little explanation why, even today with scientific farming methods, and we are pretty good at that in NZ. Observing trees too, sickness and genetic mutations usually occur around pollutants. EMF's are a pollutant. We have many things we dont understand yet. My grandmother went mad working as a pharmacist (lead poisoning). I think it runs in the family

I quickly grabbed the rest online.

The investigation of the health effects of electro-magnetic fields (EMFs) is unusual among most areas of scientific study in generating a distinct polarisation in attitudes among scientists. The depth of this division is apparent to the general public and has led to a sharp decline in the publics confidence in many scientific studies and related government pronouncements. For instance, according to research of 2007 in Europe, 76% of 27,000 people surveyed believe there are health dangers associated with mobile phones.1 In contrast, the 2007 UK government MTHR report declared that there was no health danger for the first 10 years use of a mobile phone, although admitting a risk of cancer and neurological illnesses thereafter. This degradation in the status of both the science and the scientists is becoming increasingly serious as human health is exposed to ever-greater threats from irradiation by non-thermal EMFs. Too often the absence of any proof of harm is wrongly assumed to show the proof of the absence of harm.

Government agencies admitting health risks from EMF's are prolific. Leukemia and power lines are common knowledge I thought?

You say "Here you have people worried about the remote possibility of health hazards from EMFs, even though there are plenty of studies showing that if there's any effect at all, it's undetectably small"

'Remote possibility', 'undetectably small' -really?

[blueflame]

I grabbed these quickly too

An international working group of scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals (The BioInitiative Working Group) has released its report on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and health. They document serious scientific concerns about current limits regulating how much EMF is allowable from power lines, cell phones, and many other sources of EMF exposure in daily life.
[Since the release of this ground breaking report, world governments are warning their citizens about the use of wireless technology and will no doubt refer to it when establishing future wireless, electric, and electromagnetic technology policies.]

[The Canadian Human Rights Commission approved a Policy on Environmental Sensitivities on June 15th, 2007. In this policy, EHS is classified as an environmental sensitivity and therefore a disability.]
Approximately 3% of Canadians have been diagnosed with environmental sensitivities. They usually experience neurological impairments, and often experience other symptoms including runny eyes and nose, headaches, fatigue, pain and breathing and digestive problems. Environmental sensitivities may develop gradually after chronic exposure to relatively low levels of chemicals as seen in "sick buildings," or suddenly after a major exposure to an environmental disaster or a chemical spill. This condition may be initiated by one or a combination of environmental factors such as mould, pesticides, solvents, chemicals off-gassing from carpets or furnishings, or electromagnetic phenomena.

What are the issues, the second-hand effects, and the standards for the wireless technologies?
Life on earth has evolved amidst a broad band of electromagnetic frequencies, which originate from throughout the universe. By 1980, environmental exposure to artificial, repetitive or random signals in the radiofrequency / microwave band has risen dramatically – by more than a trillion times, mostly for military technology.

Since 1980, mostly for newly-introduced commercial applications, the average “second-hand� exposure in Southern Canada has risen from about 0.005 microWatt/cm2 to the current background environmental range of 0.4 to 100.0 µWatt/cm2. We note an 8 to 20,000-fold increase with peaks in downtown Toronto and some centres, including Brantford and Mississauga. About 100 square kilometres in Southern Ontario have environmental broadband radiofrequency and microwave power emission exposures during timeframes that can exceed the Health Canada Safety Code 6 exposure limit of approximately 0.6 to 1 milliWatt/cm2 (600 - 1,000microWatt/cm2). Such illegal irradiation coverage can be expected to rise exponentially to several hundred square kilometres in both Ontario and Quebec by the end of this decade, on a more persistent basis, as more and more wireless technologies are approved by governments and marketed. Note that individuals within such exposed zones may experience a continual body temperature rise, with time, (but actually “feel� colder, and may seek greater warmth).

Johnny drinks coffee, Johnny drinks beer. Beer and coffee aren't pollutants but contain food and herbal qualities, and I get to choose and decide if my kids should have this....

As a curve ball. Like the Royal Rife Generator and radiation therapy.... Some EMF exposure could be a treatment, for, illness, even EMF sickness? Like snake venom antidote for being snake bit.

And it came to pass and while relaxing smoking the herb and supping the beer, the solution to the problem of EMF's emerged like from a cloud-poof! Dont get near that stuff. Stay as far away as practically possible for the longest of times possible. It was too easy, and it was all good.

To avoid being trampled by elephants or bitten by tigers, dont go to places where they live.

[bwilson4web]

Originally Posted by blueflame

I grabbed these quickly too. . . .

We have an old saying, "Put your money where your mouth is." Get a Gauss meter and start measuring your environment. It is a question of commitment.

Bob Wilson

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by blueflame

Fuel hermetically sealed from me in double auto skins, doesnt worry me.

Oh? You never refill your gas tank? Never breathed the vapors when you did so, or accidentally allowed some to spill on your hands?

And of course you're NEVER going to be rear-ended or T-boned by some careless driver, and see that "hermetically sealed" fuel tank rupture, and perhaps burst into flames?

Nor do you keep a can or two of gas around home, for filling up the lawnmower & other power tools, or cleaning parts...

[Jammer]

blueflame: Thanks for your posts because you are the first person I have meet that I feel is more paranoid than myself.

One more thing: H1N1 Swine Flu - Look out.

Honestly I am way more concerned about this flu than anything you brought up here, and I mean NO offense. It's just we do not see the world the same that's all. That's part of what makes the internet so interesting, we get to meet people that often hold opposite concerns and interests than ourselves. Did you ever wonder about the dangers of sitting in front of your computer as you type here?

Peace

[greasemonkee]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

You know, this really puzzles me. Here you have people worried about the remote possibility of health hazards from EMFs, even though there are plenty of studies showing that if there's any effect at all, it's undetectably small. At the same time, they're apparently not the least little bit bothered by the fact that they're sitting just a few feet from a tank full of a poisonous and highly flammable chemical, which they must refill at frequent intervals, exposing themselves to this extremely hazardous substance while potentially allowing substantial amounts of it to be released into the environment...

Would it bother you if you had to sleep beside a running microwave with the door open?

Would it bother you if you had to sleep beside a running microwave with the door closed?

Would it bother you if you had to sleep with a running microwave in the next room?


So he feels there is good reason to take the precautions and isn't willing to take that chance? What's the big deal?

Personally I agree with the OP's concern, however I am exposed to substances in my line of work which may be a long-term health risk. Why would I want to add to the problem?

We should respect one's desire to avoid the hazards even though it may require effort and possibly an unorthodox lifestyle. If the possibility of a degenerative disease doesn't phase you, then go on and don't worry about it. I would rather jump off a bridge head first onto rocky ground than I would fading out slowly over a months or years time span.