This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
11-21-2006, 11:50 AM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
This is too important to keep to myself:
http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
A word to the wise is sufficient.
http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
A word to the wise is sufficient.
11-22-2006, 03:27 AM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> This is too important to keep to myself:
>
>
> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>
Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> This is too important to keep to myself:
>
>
> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>
Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH
11-22-2006, 03:27 AM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> This is too important to keep to myself:
>
>
> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>
Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> This is too important to keep to myself:
>
>
> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>
Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH
11-22-2006, 03:27 AM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> This is too important to keep to myself:
>
>
> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>
Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> This is too important to keep to myself:
>
>
> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>
Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH
11-22-2006, 02:26 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
"Snuhwolf" <snuhwolf5150@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:20061122082709.06d4c127@vector...
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> This is too important to keep to myself:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>>
>> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>>
> Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
> Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the
> effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it
> "lightning".
> HTH
>
Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.
I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.
The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.
As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.
OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.
Mike
news:20061122082709.06d4c127@vector...
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> This is too important to keep to myself:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>>
>> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>>
> Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
> Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the
> effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it
> "lightning".
> HTH
>
Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.
I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.
The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.
As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.
OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.
Mike
11-22-2006, 02:26 PM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
"Snuhwolf" <snuhwolf5150@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:20061122082709.06d4c127@vector...
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> This is too important to keep to myself:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>>
>> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>>
> Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
> Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the
> effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it
> "lightning".
> HTH
>
Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.
I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.
The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.
As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.
OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.
Mike
news:20061122082709.06d4c127@vector...
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> This is too important to keep to myself:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>>
>> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>>
> Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
> Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the
> effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it
> "lightning".
> HTH
>
Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.
I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.
The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.
As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.
OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.
Mike
11-22-2006, 02:26 PM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
"Snuhwolf" <snuhwolf5150@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:20061122082709.06d4c127@vector...
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> This is too important to keep to myself:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>>
>> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>>
> Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
> Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the
> effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it
> "lightning".
> HTH
>
Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.
I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.
The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.
As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.
OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.
Mike
news:20061122082709.06d4c127@vector...
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:50:04 +0100 (CET)
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> This is too important to keep to myself:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollutio.../emfip1-11.htm
>>
>> A word to the wise is sufficient.
>>
> Thats the dumbest ing thing Ive ever read in my life.
> Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the
> effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it
> "lightning".
> HTH
>
Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.
I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.
The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.
As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.
OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.
Mike
11-22-2006, 03:39 PM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
> issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
> in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
> site does.
It's a question of "whose ox is gored".
>
> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
> with that weird idea.
Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
> electrical fault.
Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
> believable when we knew little about electricity.
If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.
> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
> issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
> in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
> site does.
It's a question of "whose ox is gored".
>
> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
> with that weird idea.
Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
> electrical fault.
Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
> believable when we knew little about electricity.
If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.
11-22-2006, 03:39 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
> issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
> in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
> site does.
It's a question of "whose ox is gored".
>
> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
> with that weird idea.
Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
> electrical fault.
Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
> believable when we knew little about electricity.
If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.
> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
> issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
> in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
> site does.
It's a question of "whose ox is gored".
>
> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
> with that weird idea.
Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
> electrical fault.
Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
> believable when we knew little about electricity.
If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.
11-22-2006, 03:39 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
> issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
> in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
> site does.
It's a question of "whose ox is gored".
>
> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
> with that weird idea.
Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
> electrical fault.
Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
> believable when we knew little about electricity.
If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.
> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
> issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
> in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
> site does.
It's a question of "whose ox is gored".
>
> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
> with that weird idea.
Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
> electrical fault.
Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
> believable when we knew little about electricity.
If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.
11-22-2006, 05:46 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
"kwatq" <myob@nospam.us> wrote in message
news
an.2006.11.22.20.38.57.213235@nospam.us...
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>>
>> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a
>> hot
>> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly
>> twice
>> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
>> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
>> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
>> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have
>> never
>> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came
>> up
>> with that weird idea.
>
> Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
> you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.
>
>>
>> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
>> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large
>> body
>> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring
>> or
>> electrical fault.
>
>
> Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
> frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.
>>
>> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
>> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us
>> to
>> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
>> believable when we knew little about electricity.
>
>
> If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
> think you knew what you're writing about.
>
In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?
Mike
news
an.2006.11.22.20.38.57.213235@nospam.us...> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>>
>> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a
>> hot
>> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly
>> twice
>> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
>> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
>> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
>> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have
>> never
>> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came
>> up
>> with that weird idea.
>
> Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
> you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.
>
>>
>> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
>> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large
>> body
>> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring
>> or
>> electrical fault.
>
>
> Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
> frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.
>>
>> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
>> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us
>> to
>> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
>> believable when we knew little about electricity.
>
>
> If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
> think you knew what you're writing about.
>
In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?
Mike
11-22-2006, 05:46 PM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
"kwatq" <myob@nospam.us> wrote in message
newsan.2006.11.22.20.38.57.213235@nospam.us...
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>>
>> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a
>> hot
>> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly
>> twice
>> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
>> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
>> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
>> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have
>> never
>> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came
>> up
>> with that weird idea.
>
> Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
> you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.
>
>>
>> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
>> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large
>> body
>> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring
>> or
>> electrical fault.
>
>
> Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
> frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.
>>
>> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
>> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us
>> to
>> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
>> believable when we knew little about electricity.
>
>
> If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
> think you knew what you're writing about.
>
In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?
Mike
news
an.2006.11.22.20.38.57.213235@nospam.us...> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>>
>> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a
>> hot
>> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly
>> twice
>> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
>> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
>> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
>> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have
>> never
>> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came
>> up
>> with that weird idea.
>
> Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
> you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.
>
>>
>> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
>> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large
>> body
>> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring
>> or
>> electrical fault.
>
>
> Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
> frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.
>>
>> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
>> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us
>> to
>> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
>> believable when we knew little about electricity.
>
>
> If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
> think you knew what you're writing about.
>
In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?
Mike
11-22-2006, 05:46 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
"kwatq" <myob@nospam.us> wrote in message
newsan.2006.11.22.20.38.57.213235@nospam.us...
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>>
>> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a
>> hot
>> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly
>> twice
>> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
>> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
>> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
>> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have
>> never
>> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came
>> up
>> with that weird idea.
>
> Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
> you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.
>
>>
>> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
>> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large
>> body
>> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring
>> or
>> electrical fault.
>
>
> Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
> frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.
>>
>> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
>> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us
>> to
>> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
>> believable when we knew little about electricity.
>
>
> If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
> think you knew what you're writing about.
>
In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?
Mike
news
an.2006.11.22.20.38.57.213235@nospam.us...> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:26:47 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>>
>> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a
>> hot
>> topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly
>> twice
>> the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
>> epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
>> lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
>> conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have
>> never
>> been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came
>> up
>> with that weird idea.
>
> Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
> you saying the researchers are corrupt?
>
Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.
>
>>
>> As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
>> neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large
>> body
>> of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring
>> or
>> electrical fault.
>
>
> Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
> frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.
>
Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.
>>
>> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
>> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us
>> to
>> alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
>> believable when we knew little about electricity.
>
>
> If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
> think you knew what you're writing about.
>
In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?
Mike
11-23-2006, 03:36 AM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 09:51:08 +0000
Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Janice said:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter
> > through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer.
>
> How do you know?
>
Leprechauns told her...
Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Janice said:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter
> > through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer.
>
> How do you know?
>
Leprechauns told her...
11-23-2006, 03:36 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: This_shall_shiver_your_timbers
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 09:51:08 +0000
Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Janice said:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter
> > through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer.
>
> How do you know?
>
Leprechauns told her...
Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Janice said:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter
> > through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer.
>
> How do you know?
>
Leprechauns told her...