Posted by
Minni on
URL: https://www.es-forum.com/Anyone-consider-whether-LED-cellphones-are-worse-tp1542256p1542363.html
How is this relevant to what the engineer said on the PDF book?
I suggest you attempt to contact him directly - via feb.se - if you
seek the absolute truth.
Because as I've said, there's theory, and then there's real-life
experience which debunks science.
Some people choose to remain die-hard scientists - it's their choice.
Minni
--- In
[hidden email], "charles" <charles@...> wrote:
>
> Measuring is a profession in itsself.
>
> Not many people do know for instance that a good spectrumanalyser
is a
> source for a lot of radiation.
>
> Greetings,
> Charles Claessens
> member Verband Baubiologie
> www.milieuziektes.nl
> www.milieuziektes.be
> www.hetbitje.nl
> checked by Norton Antivirus
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "minnimall" <minnimall@...>
> To: <
[hidden email]>
> Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 10:00
> Subject: [eSens] Re: Anyone consider whether LED cellphones are
worse?
>
>
> > All I can say is that I have no doubt many people are like me and
the
> > engineer in the PDF book Black On White (page 114 by Granlund-
Lind).
> >
> > That engineer's job was to check out fields via Holaday meter. But
> > (as is the case with so many others who debunked science when
> > disproven by REAL-LIFE) he discovered the scientific instruments
to
> > be white elephants. Why?
> > Because he was much more able to tolerate a smelting plant EVEN
> > THOUGH the smelting plant registered high on his professional
meter,
> > yet he was MUCH LESS able to tolerate office environments which
> > registered negligible on his meter.
> >
> > So - what do offices have that smelting plants don't?
> > Fluoresent lights & fluoresent monitors.
> > That's what!
> >
> > Thus my point - that FLUORESCENT LEDs on cellphones, i.m.h.o are
what
> > *exacerbate* cellphone dangers multifold.
> >
> > I'm not concerned because I don't use cellphones.
> > Just consider me similar to the boy in the Emperor's New Clothes.
> > Pointing out something which may not have occured to anyone.
> > I thought it appropriate to warn people here, since that's what
the
> > group is about.
> > End of story.
> >
> >
> > --- In
[hidden email], "S. Andreason" <sandreas41@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Minni,
> >>
> >> I would think the emissions from the device to be as likely a
> > source of
> >> problems. Do you have a Electromagnetic Radiation Meter, like the
> > Zap
> >> Checker? <a href="
http://www.lessemf.com/rf.html#445"> It is
much
> > more
> >> sensitive than the Trifield meter. Almost as sensitive as I am.
> >>
> >> Just like using a Gauss meter to measure magnetic fields, it is
> > equally
> >> revealing to measure the wireless range of emissions.
> >> It also allows you to compare different models and manufacturers,
> > as
> >> each device IS different.
> >> Stewart
> >>
> >> minnimall wrote:
> >> > Maybe the fluorescense emitted from cellphone LED panels may
make
> > those
> >> > cellphones way more harmful than the older cellphones? Because
> > LIGHT
> >> > itself is radiation.
> >> >
> >> > While I myself am not a cellphone user, yet I *do* find the LED
> > on my
> >> > digital camera VERY irritating.
> >> >
> >> > P.S. Take this as a rhetorical post - over & out ;-)
> >> >
> >> > Minni
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>