[NewPacifica] Re: CELL PHONE HAZARDS - THE EVIDENCE IS IN



> Frank LeFever wrote:
> > ....
> > I'd say this fellow must have studied biology through WBAI, but he's
> > from Sweden:
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >  A TWO-MINUTE CALL
> > After only two minutes of cellphone exposure, the blood-brain barrier
> > fails, ....
 


RPM REPLIES:
> We don't need to go any further than this. If the blood-brain barrier 
> fails we're just instantly dead. I wonder if Leif Salford has any idea 
> of what the blood-brain barrier actually is?

LEFEVER: Probably he does not, but I do.  (I was co-editor on a volume
of NY Academy Annals with Russ (Rpsario) Zapulla, a neurosurgeon AND
neuropsychologist who did research involving "opening " the BBB).  

It is not an "all-or-none" phenomenon.  It depends on a cellular
system that has dynamic properties (i.e. it is not like the Great Wall
of China nor like a ceramic filter): including many specific transport
systems to selectively admit molecules that would not be able to enter
by osmosis.

Accordingly, there are degrees and types of BBB "opening" due to
specific experimental manipulations, and some transient weakness or
"failure" due to insults such as blunt head trauma.

> But all of those people I see using cell phones don't instantly die
when 
> they go past the 2 minute mark when using them, so maybe the concept of 
> cell phone as death ray is just a bit overblown.


Straw man.  Admittedly, he asked for it.


LEFEVER: As for the earth's magnetic field, this is perhaps analogous
to > > "background radioactivity".  We have adapted to live with both
of> > these environmental phenomena, but that does not mean that> >
radioactivity is harmless, nor that fluctuations in natural> >
geomagnetic forces are without influence on physiology.
 
RPM:
> The Earth's magnetic field is about half a Gauss in strength, and 
> weakening all the time. Its daily fluctuation has no discernible effect 
> on humans. I forget what the magnetic field strength has to be in order 
> to harm humans but it's way up there.

Did I say anything about "harming" humans?  I have in mind the
potential SIGNAL value of any detectable CHANGE in geomagnetic
influences, possibly frequency-specific.  (Cf. Schumann resonances)


> Lots of people are exposed to pretty high levels of magnetic flux every 
> day and no one has proven that they cause harm.
 
Admittedly the jury is still out as to "harm" in any crude or
immediate sense.  Confounding of occupational exposure with
demographic variables or other environmental variables are difficult
to disentangle.


> Unfortunately, for many people magnetism is as mysterious today as it 
> was to everyone 600 years ago.
> -- 

And well it should be!  It IS mysterious.  In the basic sense of the
word "mystery".

--Frank LeFever



questions/problems with archive to: webmaster@mcabee.org
Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.16