farmerste

Seattle Magazine | Arts & Culture/News & Features/Health | UW Scientist Henry Lai Makes Waves in the Cell Phone Industry that is one of many, it explains the whole story i feel, with regard to the science and its funding. I realise it is a bold statement, and your body DOES know the difference, when exposed to non-ionising radiation it goes into a 'defensive' mode and recognises it as an attack at a cellular level. look at the studies done about melatonin levels in humans etc when exposed to non-ionising radiation and you will find it is lowered ! why??

1- a RF signal is most certainly NOT an rf signal with or without data the waveform changes dramatically in shape etc 2- i may not be qualified to digest papers you are correct but i have at least tried 3- the program only showed measured values they cannot be wrong if the meter is calibrated correctly- thus the liebour government repeated them and found them to be higher - go look it up 4- the paper quite clearly shows how cancer rates have increased when wireless communication has been used, and have you never heard of a radio? television ?? they all communicate data i suspect you have already decided what you want to be true, but non-ionising radiation causes damage to DNA when transmitting data.

if you think that all the science papers that powerwatch refer to on the site 'pubmed' are somehow a hoax then you are mistaken, like i explained previously 3 types of research are done and the ones that do not transmit data i.e- not the real world, do not ( mostly) find harmful effects, however when these devices are used in the 'real world' and tested transmitting data negative health effects are found. its a scientific fact !, even if we don't like the truth it is still the truth. non-ionising radiation causes DNA damage/mutation and cell damage when transmitting data, it also causes the human body to go into a 'histamine' type response as if under attack/allergy according to some experiments. I am neither a statistician nor a scientist, i like the majory believed that all this was a load of bull, until i actually started to look at the science papers and how funding from the telecoms industry was skewing the truth, i.e telecoms funding either directly or indirectly funded the types 1 and 2 research which they 'knew' would show no or little effects. interestingly enough the panorama program that started a lot of the controversy was merely showing the measured levels of radiation, did you know that the LIEbour government also conducted the same experiments and found levels HIGHER than those in the program? http://iddd.de/umtsno/cancertrends.pdf this is a swedish study, that as far as i am aware has been carried out the same way over a period of time showing the increase in cancers, especially with the introduction of wireless communications

i think i am not communicating my point very well, if you are healthy and quite possibly young ,the DNA mutation and cell damage can be reapired by the body, similar to gettin a sunburn etc, but if you are older perhaps this damage cannot be repaired as quickly due to age? this may be a reason for higer incidence in older people ?? regardless of the technology used damage is done, there is also the consideration of other factors that may contribute which could be ??? lots of things ! but the damage to the human body is still done and that is not a good thing i think you will agree, it is not worth the risk in my opinion just like sun bathing without sunscreen isnt a sensible thing.

thanks guys , i don't feel so bad now, just the normal microsoft uselessness

the confusion around is massive, there is a new zealand study that also says that cancer rates have gone down, but worry that children may be have some cummulative effects. also death rate is not the same as incident rate. this area is a total minefield i have been studying it off and on for years. and the post i made a little while ago is the truth of the matter. it is down to personal health and useage , but if the device transmits data through you then it mutates dna and damages cells. there is also the introduction of DECT cordless phones in the home to take into account too if you look up the work of professor ollie johannson you can see that prostate cancer incident increased after the introduction of VHF radio. endless statistics and viewpoints, but the science i have said still holds true, damage DOES occur to DNA and cells at much lower levels than those regarded as safe, when you test in real worls scenarios.

In the last 32 years, brain cancer incidence rates have increased by 23% for men and 25% for women. In 2010, the incidence rate was 8 new cases per 100,000 men and 5 new cases per 100,000 women. This equates to nearly 2,300 newly diagnosed cases in men and just under 1,700 in women. The reasons for the increase in this relatively rare cancer are still under investigation. that is from the ONS website

If you want to know the truth about non-ionising radiation and its dangers you firstly need to understand that there are 3 real methods of scientific investigation. 1- the first method assumes that the ONLY way damage can occur is through heating the tissue, of course this is very minimal, so all results show no if little damage. 2- the second method is to test the dangers by applying a sinusoidal wave of frequency 'x' and this also shows very little negative effects 3- the third method actually applies the 'real world use' where data is been transmitted between the device and the wireless access point, and this has been found to mutate DNA and to actually damage cells too !! most of the funding is for type 1 and 2 types of research that are likely to show little or no negative effects. type3 research almost always shows negative biological effects. over 70% if INDEPENDANTLY funded research shows negative effects. using non-ionising radiation is like going out in the sun without sun cream in my opinion, but a healthy person should be able to 'shake off' the damage done. if you want to read the scientific papers google powerwatch, they are all there listed, make up your own mind, but the one thing that EVERYONE'S body does is react to non-ionising radiation in a negative/threatening way.

Hi all, i have been waiting for a month now for microsoft to associate my schools licenses with my school microsoft email/account. I can sign in ok to email and to the microsoft account. The support at pugh has been great, but i was wondering if anyone else has had the same? Microsoft say the problem has been escalated but that was weeks ago, and a month to resolve a login problem for a customer is just disgusting.

hi there, does anyone have a manual for this laminating machine. it is the Oslo ultralam 320 digital puch laminator machine, cant find one anywhere. if anyone has a manual they could scan, or a user guide for staff that would be most helpful many thanks

is the high power led just there to draw some current from the circuit so the control board senses it? can you tell us what voltage LED you used and which way you set polarity? thanks

have you looked at EM powerpoint to video converter, there is a free version ?

I found recently that a driver extracted from a running machine using Smart driver backup portable version ,did not get removed during sysprep. i took the intel video driver off a working machine and then as I recreated a new image I found it hadn't been stripped after sysprep. this was intel HD graphics v9.17.10.3347 ( win7 to win 7 obviously) hope this might help someone out.

has anyone got any more recommendations in this area, i am looking for an LED scrolling display we could perhaps update with a usb or sd-card

Hi does anyone use the Celestron :- Celestron Amoeba Digital Microscope with 200x: Amazon.co.uk: Camera & Photo I was wondering if you need any software with this microsocpe, it looks similat to the old Intel Play ones, or are the tts ones the best choice? does anyone know if the tts or the celestron will work with Amcap viewer