Fwd> Cell Phones?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd> Cell Phones?

Marc Martin
Administrator
Hi all,

Here is a question that somebody asked on another list I'm
subscribed to -- does anyone have a good answer for this?

"is it true that if a cell phone is turned on but not
engaged in conversation that the electromagnetic field
that it generates is a lot lower than if the phone is
engaged in conversation?"

If someone has an answer to this, I'll pass it on to
the person who asked the question.

Thanks!

Marc

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Fwd> Cell Phones?

Glenn Coleman
I am not an expert on cell technology, but have developed other wireless
technology. I believe in simplistic terms there is less EMF when phone is
idle.

A cell phone sits and listens for broadcast messages and responds if it
hears a message destine for its address. It therefore is receiving data all
the time from doing the listening, but the amount of data would be less
since it is not transmitting like during a conversation. During
transmission it would be a much larger stream of data around the antenna =
greater EMF.

In the case of somebody holding phone by their head, a cell phone in
transmission is like placing your head beside a cell tower, which would have
obvious negative effects. If they placed an idle phone by their head, they
would still get EMF, but at a lower concentration. The question then
becomes how much EMF is bad for the brain? Or how much EMF triggers ES?

That is my two cents from general assumptions.

Glenn


----Original Message Follows----
From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [eSens] Fwd> Cell Phones?
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:37:52 -0700

Hi all,

Here is a question that somebody asked on another list I'm
subscribed to -- does anyone have a good answer for this?

"is it true that if a cell phone is turned on but not
engaged in conversation that the electromagnetic field
that it generates is a lot lower than if the phone is
engaged in conversation?"

If someone has an answer to this, I'll pass it on to
the person who asked the question.

Thanks!

Marc

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Fwd> Cell Phones?

Benson, Sarah (Sen L. Allison)
In reply to this post by Marc Martin
My understanding is that when the phone engages the signal from the
nearest tower the power levels of the headset go up. This is because
the phone, as an antenna, is transmitting. The power also goes up when
there are obstructions between the phone and the tower....the phone
draws more signal from the tower.

Sarah

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Martin [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, 14 September 2004 2:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [eSens] Fwd> Cell Phones?



Hi all,

Here is a question that somebody asked on another list I'm subscribed to
-- does anyone have a good answer for this?

"is it true that if a cell phone is turned on but not
engaged in conversation that the electromagnetic field
that it generates is a lot lower than if the phone is
engaged in conversation?"

If someone has an answer to this, I'll pass it on to
the person who asked the question.

Thanks!

Marc



 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd> Cell Phones?

Emil at Less EMF Inc
In reply to this post by Marc Martin
The phone will emit intermittently, in order to "tell" the system where it is.
The power of this signal will be the same as the power during conversation.
Low power if signal is good, higher power if signal is weak.

Emil DeToffol
www.lessemf.com

At 09:37 PM 9/13/2004, you wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>Here is a question that somebody asked on another list I'm
>subscribed to -- does anyone have a good answer for this?
>
> "is it true that if a cell phone is turned on but not
> engaged in conversation that the electromagnetic field
> that it generates is a lot lower than if the phone is
> engaged in conversation?"
>
>If someone has an answer to this, I'll pass it on to
>the person who asked the question.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Marc
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd> Cell Phones?

Gruendg
In reply to this post by Marc Martin
In einer eMail vom 14.09.2004 08:35:54 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerze schreibt
[hidden email]:


Hallo,

someone asked,
> "is it true that if a cell phone is turned on but not
> engaged in conversation that the electromagnetic field
> that it generates is a lot lower than if the phone is
> engaged in conversation?"


Yes, it is true. Through electroacupuncture I could measure the biological
negative effect, the EMF of a cell phone has while conversation and while just
beeing turned on and waiting for a call. The effect of the phone only being
turned on is weaker than the effect of a normal electric bulb near your body and
it disappears again, if you put the phone aside at a distance. The effect of
the cell phone during conversation is about 5 times stronger at the start of
teh conversation, it accumulates with the duration of the conversation and with
the number of calls and stays with you after the conversation for a longer
time - may be hours. EEG research has shown that the effect of one call of 1
minute duration it takes several days to recover. Research on the brain of rats
has shown that the radiation of a cell phone damages the brain cells so that
they die some time after the exposure.

Aware of this I tried to find things, that could prevent this negative
effect. Most of the "devices" mentioned in this list do this, also some crystals and
certain geometrical structures mostly spiral like. But why and how they do
this, is an interesting but difficult question. The key point is here the
longitudinal or Tesla waves with their peculiar qualities, that are changed by these
tools.

Dietrich Gruen
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]