> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of The Fool > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 3:56 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Cell Phone Signal Excites Brain Near the Cell Phone > > ---------- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > It isn't whether it can penetrate it is how much penetrates, what is the > energy of the penetrating em signal and where the penetration occurs. The > study does not by the way prove that the em signal penetrates into the > brain; > the TMS signal may be affected by superficial stuff so the phone em signal > may alter superficial processes such as blood flow. > > ---- > A study I posted to this list last year showed that red blood cells could > probably clump together from cell phone radiation. > > Another study I posted showed damage to corneas from cell phone radiation, > and one I posted a long time ago show a correlation between corneal > cancers and cell phone radiation. > > So that is obviously something that has been repeatedly shown to occur.
I realize that you think that, but it raises an obvious question. What do you do when different studies produce different results? How do you think the results of the studies should be weighed against each other? > Individual molecules would resonate fairly well (cell phone use similar > frequencies to microwaves). Wheras Dan has argued that in agregate the > temperature change is small to negliable, I have argued that individual > molecules may become super-heated and changed/damaged OR possibly > change/damage other molecules / strucures / DNA. I'd very much appreciate it if you'd walk through the physics to show how this is done. In particular, it would be worth showing how one molecule in a constant EM field (a darn good approximation when considering sizes comprising tens of thousands of molecules) becomes superheated, while its companions don't. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
