Subject:  Re cordless (fwd)
Date:     Tue, 12 May 1998 103449 -0500 (CDT)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To:       emfguru@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 09:14:17 +0300 (IDT)
From: John Goldsmith 
To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
Cc: emfguru@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: cordless (fwd)

Ingrid:
     Alisdar has more up to date information than do I.  At home, we
use a cordless phone rather freely, but no cellphones.  Ours is the 
older type, not the GSM.  What I quoted is also from an epidemiologist, 
and may not be up to date.    I am glad you raised the matter and
appreciate Alisdar's update.     John Goldsmith

On Mon, 11 May 1998, Roy L. Beavers wrote:

> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:23:00 +0200
> From: "HIGH, INGRID" 
> To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
> Subject: Re: cordless (fwd)
> 
> John,
> 
> are you here referring to the ones one install in one's home? or are you
> referring to the kinds installed in office-buildings?  For the latter
> (DECT-system) I have been given information that the individual
> telephone operates at about 1/10th the power of a mobile phone, and that
> the frequency operates at double the GSM (1900) - and that  the
> base-stations send all the calls going on.
> 
> I'd be glad to hear that the private ones - one cellular to one
> base-phone that you just plug into your ordinary telephone socket -
> follow the specification you mention here :-)
> 
> But all the same since the effect on the human body is so "window"-like
> how do we know that this doesn't just hit a weak spot? And what about
> the temptation to sit for hours talking?
> 
> with warm greetings,
> Ingrid High
> 
>  ----------
> From: Roy L. Beavers
> To: emfguru@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: cordless (fwd)
> Date: 11. May 1998 09:13
> 
> 
>  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:21:23 +0300 (IDT)
> From: John Goldsmith 
> To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
> Cc: emfguru@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: cordless (fwd)
> 
> Ordinary cordless phones do not use the same type of radiation nor carry
> the same risks." Cordless telephones have a base unit that is wired to
> the
> landline telephone service; these telephones operate at about 1/600 the
> power of cellular telephones and a much lower frequency (49 MHz)."
> Source
> is Rothman et al. "Epidemiology" vol 7, p.292, 1996.
>                  John Goldsmith
> 
> On Thu, 7 May 1998, Roy L. Beavers wrote:
> 
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 16:34:55 +1000
> > From: Jennie Burke 
> > To: rbeavers@llion.org
> > Subject: cordless
> >
> > Dear Guru,
> > Could you clarify something for me please.  With a cordless phone used in
> > the house and operating on the house phone, does one still have the same
> > problems with EMF from the antenna as one does with a mobile phone ?   Mine
> > only has a range of maybe 50 feet from the cordless phone base in the house.
> > Regards,
> > Jennie Burke
> >
> >
> 
> 




Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html