10-14-2009, 01:03 AM
|
#21 (permalink)
|
Concerned human
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 01:18 AM
|
#22 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Nashua, New Hampshire
Posts: 53
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
|
What I said doesn't contradict what the WHO is saying. We do need to research more closely the effects of *large* EMF fields, day in and day out, on the human body.. mostly to be prudent. Yes, higher frequency RF fields can impart more energy than lower ones, and the jury is still out on what mobile phones *in close proximity* do to things like brain tissue, since we know 2.4Ghz is particularly effective at heating water molecules. But, they are talking about significant sources of EMF. MRI machines, Power transmission lines and substations, radio transmitters, etc.
Those are *huge* orders of magnitude bigger than anything in a Prius.
We're all sitting in .3-.6 Gauss from the Earth's magnetic field anyway for our entire lives (unless you are an astronaut), and our ancestors have been since life began here.
__________________
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 01:18 AM
|
#23 (permalink)
|
Concerned human
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from buying an electric hybrid. But, EMF's are a serious issue, not to be embraced so casually, especially if they are becoming more prevalent everyday and it's exposure compounding. Serious enough to be an issue with the WHO. Imagine if you will (you know, outside the box), if EMF's were deemed a serious health issue. Society would have to be rebuilt. People would be livid. Nope, better to say that "more conclusive research has to be done" and let it drift afloat for a time. For now, I'll look into bio-diesel or hydrogen, as it develops.
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 02:28 AM
|
#24 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Wet Coast, Kanuckistan.
Posts: 1,275
Thanks: 100
Thanked 306 Times in 178 Posts
|
If you read the text of the WHO EMF project, they are concentrating on the large and powerful sources of EMF, not EMF from small electric motors shielded by steel or household appliances. They are also researching long term effects of low frequency EMF on health mainly to deal with "public concerns" although there is no evidence yet that supports these "concerns"
The benefits of electricity vastly outweigh the dangers.
Quote:
Originally posted by Malus: Actually, I'm almost electric free. I leave breakers off on areas I don't use, gotten rid of cellphone, use a plug in (with cord) phone. I also barbeque all year round (using the stove as minimal as possible), no microwave, no hairdryer. The list goes on to eliminate what I perceive (since there is no definitive conclusion...
|
From the WHO website Malus helpfully supplied:
Quote:
Conclusions from scientific research
In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields. However, some gaps in knowledge about biological effects exist and need further research. A wide range of environmental influences causes biological effects. 'Biological effect' does not equal 'health hazard'. Special research is needed to identify and measure health hazards.
|
How much more conclusive does it need to be?
Hybrids are just as safe as ice vehicles in terms of EMF and are safer by far if emissions are your concern.
Last edited by orange4boy; 10-14-2009 at 02:45 AM..
Reason: spelling, added quote for context
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 02:54 AM
|
#25 (permalink)
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 24
Thanked 161 Times in 107 Posts
|
Quote:
Conclusions from scientific research
In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields. However, some gaps in knowledge about biological effects exist and need further research. A wide range of environmental influences causes biological effects. 'Biological effect' does not equal 'health hazard'. Special research is needed to identify and measure health hazards.
|
Fixed.
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 06:43 AM
|
#26 (permalink)
|
Modified Driver
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Western middle of nowhereish New Hampshire
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
|
Every now and then someone comes along who very very very obviously knows what he is talking about. I would say that JJW has demonstrated that he has a pretty solid working knowledge of EMF, to the extent that he is up to date on what the scientific community has to say about it. He has supplied numerical data that clearly demonstrates that levels of EMF inside of a hybrid are less dangerous than other sources people regularly get exposed to outside the car. Given that EMF sources have been around since electricity has been invented, and that the life span of the average human being has increased dramatically since then, I'd say we are pretty safe from ill effects of the mild EMFs out there.
On the list of things that freak the crap out of me, I'm more worried about diesel fumes, smog, inhaling scented oils from air fresheners, solar radiation, carcinogens in plastics being transferred to my foods, second hand smoke (cigarette and otherwise), lead poisoning holes in the ozone layer, global pollution, arsenic in the water supply (it occurs naturally), carbon monoxide and all the other things that are going to cause me to die of cancer or otherwise. Oh and I'm still at the bottom of the list. Let's face it, out of the potential causes of death and illness, why not focus on just avoiding the big ones instead of becoming paranoid of things that haven't been proven to do any harm? If you really go out of your way to avoid the truly harmful things along with the ones you don't understand/are unproven/exist in science fiction medical journals/are proclaimed harmful by religious groups like the Scientologists/are just too progressive for your stone-aged imagination, you'll end up living in the woods, wearing a tin foil hat and dying of cancer anyway. Or, if you like hybrids, go get one and drive it. You'll be fine, trust me.
__________________
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Twerp For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-14-2009, 07:00 AM
|
#27 (permalink)
|
Modified Driver
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Western middle of nowhereish New Hampshire
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
|
Just to end this argument before it arises, No I'm not a champion for hybrids. I think they fuel they save doesn't justify the price you have to pay for them when you can get similar mileage out of a well driven Civic. So my assertions are not made out of bias.
__________________
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 08:07 AM
|
#28 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Monroe, LA
Posts: 308
Thanks: 11
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
|
Malus,
The fact that the WHO has decided to research EMF effects is not evidence for their being harmful. After the studies done back in the 1990s, most of the research being done today is more of an ongoing battle against junk science than anything else.
Natural sources of EMF and EM radiation are, on the whole, much more powerful and potentially hazardous ( see reference).
I'll quote something I wrote in the other thread, "Being afraid of EMF in the quantities generated by an Insight is, statistically speaking, probably like worrying about a camel in Saudi Arabia, munching on grass near an airport runway, which happens to be contaminated with uranium dust produced by a mine 1,000 miles away, accidentally gets hooked on the landing gear of a 747, travels to your home town, walks to your house, spits in your eye and gives you cancer."
__________________
"Jesus didn't bring 'Natty Lite' to the party. He brought the good stuff."
Last edited by chuckm; 10-14-2009 at 08:15 AM..
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 10:49 AM
|
#29 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 674
Thanks: 40
Thanked 39 Times in 27 Posts
|
Malus - every post you make takes precious time off your life using that EMF-cesspool of a computer you're using... you'd better hurry up and make a valid point before you keel over, or find a brave soul willing to dictate so you can stand at a safe distance. If I were you I'd post in a place where you could at least make an impact on people and have a legacy...maybe someplace where people think its worth being as cautious as you are. This is a forum full of people who drive cars - far more statistically likely to cause bodily harm or death than everyday EMF exposure.
__________________
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 08:15 PM
|
#30 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Wet Coast, Kanuckistan.
Posts: 1,275
Thanks: 100
Thanked 306 Times in 178 Posts
|
Quote:
WHO: Despite extensive research, to date there is no evidence to conclude that exposure to low level electromagnetic fields is harmful to human health.
|
Are we done here?
__________________
Vortex generators are old tech. My new and improved vortex alternators are unstoppable.
"It’s easy to explain how rockets work but explaining the aerodynamics of a wing takes a rocket scientist.
|
|
|
|