Nah I'm good, if this stuff really was causing brain cancer with how ubiquitous they are we'd all know at least one person with it. These videos too often are by people who don't actually know what the numbers even mean, akin to the ghost hunter shows where they're making a big deal over a "magnetic anomaly" that could be coming from the electric motor in the fridge they're standing nearby or switching to smaller units to make it sound like "it's over 9000" when it's the value of the Earth's own magnetic field or just ambient background radiation.
Well, wireless devices are radioactive by nature. And the stories of women getting breast cancer where they keep their phones in their bras are numerous.
So the people who got brain tumors from having phones to their ear, the women who got breast cancers from phones in bras, what would cause that then? I understand LF / ELF are harmless but as you go up in frequency things get "hot"
Power levels factor heavily into RF exposure. The average cell phone emits about 300 milliwatts. An FM broadcast antenna has an effective radiated power in the large fraction of a megawatt. This, of course, includes antenna gain. A cell phone antenna is more like a dummy load than a gain antenna.
Well, earbuds are powerful enough to transmit a few yards whereas phones transmit several miles. As signal strength decreases according as an X-squared law (for distance), that makes phone transmissions a million times stronger than earbuds.
I personally keep my phone in a knee pocket. I've done this for decades. If I get knee cancer, I'll let you know.
True. I still don’t like the idea of anything wireless in my head. RF/EMI fields can still cause issues. Like cancer clusters of people living under high tension lines.
Unfortunately most new phones don't have a jack. This made me think about something. I saw Van Halen in their final years on tour. With all the wireless tech for stage gear, Eddie Van Halen had a cord to both his guitar and the microphone he used fir backup vocals. I thought that was weird. He runs all over the stage and his cord is constantly getting in his, and others way.
Going to a wired headset may not be a solution. RF can travel along a wire and depending on operating conditions might be worse than a wireless headset. But it will be a different frequency and modulation type. Try both ways and see which causes the least amount of fatigue and discomfort.
Bluetooth uses the same 2.45 GHz as microwave ovens. Why do microwaves use 2.45GHz? The consensus is that it's a good frequency to penetrate a reasonable amount into water. But your brain is more fat.
There is always so much confusion about electromagnetic energy. This is my particular field, so please let me help people get a bit of actual real information. Human audio range is between 20 Hz to 20 kHz. This frequency range falls within the range of ELF/ULF/And VLF. The frequency ranges are as follows: ELF 3Hz-300Hz, ULF 300Hz-3kHz, VLF 3kHz-30kHz, LF 30kHz-300kHz, MF 300 kHz-3MHz, HF 3MHz-30MHz, VHF 30MHz-300MHz, UHF 300 MHz-3GHz, SHF 3GHz-30 GHz, EHF 30GHz-300GHz. We do not have anything that exceeds very far into the EHF band. Most satellite communications is typically between 300 MHz to a maximum of about 40GHz. All of this on the Electromagnetic scale is non-ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation does not begin until Ultraviolet light. The UV frequency range is between 7.5 x 10 to the 14th power to 3 x 10 to the 16th power. This is substantially beyond the Radio Frequency ranges that we use. Although there are health affects to the RF ranges (some positive and some negative) low field strengths can cause damage to cellular function, however it does not damage DNA ionic bonds. This is why it is classified as non-ionizing radiation. Cells damaged by RF or any other cause is dealt with within the body by a natural process of recycling. It is not advisable to continue causing cellular damage beyond what the recycling system can cope with, this leads to other health complications. All this being said, this does not cause mutated cells with the ability to create additional mutated daughter cells. This is what we would classify as malignant cells. Radio Frequency does not cause cancer, but it can have adverse health effects in high levels. I hope this clears up any misconceptions that folks may have.
This is the stuff I've been waiting for. Thank you!
So based on what you said, the 2.4GHz UHF blutooth airbuds don't damage DNA's ionic bonds, but may still damage cells or cause other disturbances within the body, so it's best not to, say, wear them 12hrs a day? And to be 100% safe, wired earbuds would be the way to go as the energy would be contained within the wires from source to endpoint (the speakers inside the buds)?
The bluetooth power is extremely low, damage would be minimum, but there would still be some damage, whether or not it is enough to cause actual damage is up to debate. Earbuds use nothing but audio frequency. The frequencies would be between 20Hz to 20kHz, so simply audio frequencies, no damage at all, unless you play your music too loud 😁
I see. So the power used to link them to your phone is simply a sort of "passive" power that listens for the signal your phone emits (audio data stream I assume) + the power to the actual speakers inside them (internal power, not emitting)?
edit- what about the beam-forming aspect? Like, would the phone's emission not be directed and bounced in your brain or something?
The ear buds do emit power. All digital communications at higher data rates use bi-directional communications for data transfer (error correction, confirmation of receipt and synchronization). The maximum power output allowed for the longest range (100 meter) bluetooth Class 1 is +20 dBm or 100mW. The standard Class 2 is 10 meter range with a power output of +4dBm (2.5 mW) and finally Class 3 has only 0dBm (1mW) output with a very short distance of communication about 1 meter. Typical earbuds are going to be Class 2 with 2.5mW output. That is 0.0025 Watts. A very small amount of power that really can't do much damage. The amount of heat it can produce in a water molecule is extremely small. Not really much to worry about. Power emissions lose power with the square of distance, even an inch loses a large amount of power. Fortunately receivers can receive signals at ridiculously small strengths, they don't even measure power at receiver sensitivity levels with watts, they use the logarithmic scale Decibels in relation to one milliwatt. Typical receivers in this frequency range can reliably receive -131dBm and produce a 10dB SINAD value for solid reception. This is 10 to the negative 13th power or 0.00000000000000001 watts. This is why RF has such fantastic range, because of how low a signal can still be demodulated. RF does not travel through water without massive losses that dissipate the energy as heat. The signal bouncing around in the head is a lossy proposition, however by placing a wireless transmitter under your chin, you can actually focus the energy in the direction of your mouth. It is actually kinda neat that your can create a directional antenna with your head. Not ideal and not very efficient, but it works in a pinch.
I am saving this! Thank you. This puts my mind at ease as I have several friends who are blutoothed up all the time (Apple watches, earbuds, mouses and keyboards, speakers, you name it)
i think stuff like this is maybe not immediately dangerous, but over time, the small amounts add up until one day you have a big problem.
much like a pro wrestler who takes a body slam. a single body slam is not that bad, but after taking your 5,000th one, you're laying on the mat with a broken back.
this aligns with all the other "slow kill" shit they push on us. cigarettes, vaccines, chemicals in the food & water.
in small, trace amounts... no big deal, but over time.... COPD & lung cancer, blood clots & damaged organs, stomach & colon cancers, etc.
Nah I'm good, if this stuff really was causing brain cancer with how ubiquitous they are we'd all know at least one person with it. These videos too often are by people who don't actually know what the numbers even mean, akin to the ghost hunter shows where they're making a big deal over a "magnetic anomaly" that could be coming from the electric motor in the fridge they're standing nearby or switching to smaller units to make it sound like "it's over 9000" when it's the value of the Earth's own magnetic field or just ambient background radiation.
I'm sure people won't love this reference, but the lead surgeon for Neuralink said that the wireless headphones don't do anything negative.
I know 3 people off the top of my head (pun intended) that had brain cancer but more likely from cell phones than earbuds.
Thinking the same thing.
My triple-jabbed + shingles + flu wife has been using Apple wireless earbuds with her iPhone for years and she's healthier than I am.
Well, wireless devices are radioactive by nature. And the stories of women getting breast cancer where they keep their phones in their bras are numerous.
Is that alpha, beta or gamma emissions from that cell phone?
No? Then you are clearly ignorant about EM emissions.
So the people who got brain tumors from having phones to their ear, the women who got breast cancers from phones in bras, what would cause that then? I understand LF / ELF are harmless but as you go up in frequency things get "hot"
Power levels factor heavily into RF exposure. The average cell phone emits about 300 milliwatts. An FM broadcast antenna has an effective radiated power in the large fraction of a megawatt. This, of course, includes antenna gain. A cell phone antenna is more like a dummy load than a gain antenna.
Well, earbuds are powerful enough to transmit a few yards whereas phones transmit several miles. As signal strength decreases according as an X-squared law (for distance), that makes phone transmissions a million times stronger than earbuds.
I personally keep my phone in a knee pocket. I've done this for decades. If I get knee cancer, I'll let you know.
True, but would the proximity to your brain not factor in?
True. I still don’t like the idea of anything wireless in my head. RF/EMI fields can still cause issues. Like cancer clusters of people living under high tension lines.
Unfortunately most new phones don't have a jack. This made me think about something. I saw Van Halen in their final years on tour. With all the wireless tech for stage gear, Eddie Van Halen had a cord to both his guitar and the microphone he used fir backup vocals. I thought that was weird. He runs all over the stage and his cord is constantly getting in his, and others way.
I am also skeptical about why they are removing 8mm jacks. Like they really want us all to move towards wireless everything...
If that alone doesn't raise suspicions on this board, we have a problem
8 mm? That’s about a third of an inch. I believe you mean an eighth of an inch or ~3 mm…
3.5mm, sorry. Think I confused 8mm with 1/8"
Yep
3.5 mm
Idk who's downvoting all these comments. Would you care to step forward and contribute something?
If it causes cancer could taking fenbendazole be a good way to stop it before it starts?
Going to a wired headset may not be a solution. RF can travel along a wire and depending on operating conditions might be worse than a wireless headset. But it will be a different frequency and modulation type. Try both ways and see which causes the least amount of fatigue and discomfort.
Bluetooth uses the same 2.45 GHz as microwave ovens. Why do microwaves use 2.45GHz? The consensus is that it's a good frequency to penetrate a reasonable amount into water. But your brain is more fat.
There is always so much confusion about electromagnetic energy. This is my particular field, so please let me help people get a bit of actual real information. Human audio range is between 20 Hz to 20 kHz. This frequency range falls within the range of ELF/ULF/And VLF. The frequency ranges are as follows: ELF 3Hz-300Hz, ULF 300Hz-3kHz, VLF 3kHz-30kHz, LF 30kHz-300kHz, MF 300 kHz-3MHz, HF 3MHz-30MHz, VHF 30MHz-300MHz, UHF 300 MHz-3GHz, SHF 3GHz-30 GHz, EHF 30GHz-300GHz. We do not have anything that exceeds very far into the EHF band. Most satellite communications is typically between 300 MHz to a maximum of about 40GHz. All of this on the Electromagnetic scale is non-ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation does not begin until Ultraviolet light. The UV frequency range is between 7.5 x 10 to the 14th power to 3 x 10 to the 16th power. This is substantially beyond the Radio Frequency ranges that we use. Although there are health affects to the RF ranges (some positive and some negative) low field strengths can cause damage to cellular function, however it does not damage DNA ionic bonds. This is why it is classified as non-ionizing radiation. Cells damaged by RF or any other cause is dealt with within the body by a natural process of recycling. It is not advisable to continue causing cellular damage beyond what the recycling system can cope with, this leads to other health complications. All this being said, this does not cause mutated cells with the ability to create additional mutated daughter cells. This is what we would classify as malignant cells. Radio Frequency does not cause cancer, but it can have adverse health effects in high levels. I hope this clears up any misconceptions that folks may have.
This is the stuff I've been waiting for. Thank you!
So based on what you said, the 2.4GHz UHF blutooth airbuds don't damage DNA's ionic bonds, but may still damage cells or cause other disturbances within the body, so it's best not to, say, wear them 12hrs a day? And to be 100% safe, wired earbuds would be the way to go as the energy would be contained within the wires from source to endpoint (the speakers inside the buds)?
The bluetooth power is extremely low, damage would be minimum, but there would still be some damage, whether or not it is enough to cause actual damage is up to debate. Earbuds use nothing but audio frequency. The frequencies would be between 20Hz to 20kHz, so simply audio frequencies, no damage at all, unless you play your music too loud 😁
I see. So the power used to link them to your phone is simply a sort of "passive" power that listens for the signal your phone emits (audio data stream I assume) + the power to the actual speakers inside them (internal power, not emitting)?
edit- what about the beam-forming aspect? Like, would the phone's emission not be directed and bounced in your brain or something?
The ear buds do emit power. All digital communications at higher data rates use bi-directional communications for data transfer (error correction, confirmation of receipt and synchronization). The maximum power output allowed for the longest range (100 meter) bluetooth Class 1 is +20 dBm or 100mW. The standard Class 2 is 10 meter range with a power output of +4dBm (2.5 mW) and finally Class 3 has only 0dBm (1mW) output with a very short distance of communication about 1 meter. Typical earbuds are going to be Class 2 with 2.5mW output. That is 0.0025 Watts. A very small amount of power that really can't do much damage. The amount of heat it can produce in a water molecule is extremely small. Not really much to worry about. Power emissions lose power with the square of distance, even an inch loses a large amount of power. Fortunately receivers can receive signals at ridiculously small strengths, they don't even measure power at receiver sensitivity levels with watts, they use the logarithmic scale Decibels in relation to one milliwatt. Typical receivers in this frequency range can reliably receive -131dBm and produce a 10dB SINAD value for solid reception. This is 10 to the negative 13th power or 0.00000000000000001 watts. This is why RF has such fantastic range, because of how low a signal can still be demodulated. RF does not travel through water without massive losses that dissipate the energy as heat. The signal bouncing around in the head is a lossy proposition, however by placing a wireless transmitter under your chin, you can actually focus the energy in the direction of your mouth. It is actually kinda neat that your can create a directional antenna with your head. Not ideal and not very efficient, but it works in a pinch.
I am saving this! Thank you. This puts my mind at ease as I have several friends who are blutoothed up all the time (Apple watches, earbuds, mouses and keyboards, speakers, you name it)
Wireless devices emit radiation in levels that potentially cause tumors and other health disturbances over long periods of exposure.
and this video is just a conversation starter. The learning takes place in these comments
Agreed. Sounded like he was at work messing around lol
i think stuff like this is maybe not immediately dangerous, but over time, the small amounts add up until one day you have a big problem.
much like a pro wrestler who takes a body slam. a single body slam is not that bad, but after taking your 5,000th one, you're laying on the mat with a broken back.
this aligns with all the other "slow kill" shit they push on us. cigarettes, vaccines, chemicals in the food & water.
in small, trace amounts... no big deal, but over time.... COPD & lung cancer, blood clots & damaged organs, stomach & colon cancers, etc.
This is what my logic on it is too. Was hoping someone with extensive knowledge on EMF's would drop in here but idk if this post got enough traction
I am not the expert you are looking for but do have a few PDF's about RF hazards... https://files.catbox.moe/dliw36.pdf
And 2 videos about 5G which deserve to be seen (not comfy)
https://files.catbox.moe/x7kmeu.mp4
https://files.catbox.moe/wkkkea.mp4