Subject: Re Mobile shields (Byrnes)(Curry).
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 181812 -0500
From: Roy Beavers
To: guru
--------------------------------------------------
........Response from EMF-L.......
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Mobile shields (Byrnes).
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 17:40:07 -0500
From: "Bill P. Curry"
Reply-To: BPCurry@MCS.com
Organization: EMSciTek Consulting co.
To: roy@emfguru.com
References: <39FA1F7A.2B0@bluewin.ch> <39FA9A89.4960EDEC@emfguru.com>
Roy and Jane,
I am a firm believer in the use of shields and other protective devices to
prevent the onslaught of illnesses that I expect will occur from excessive,
unprotective uses of cellular phones. I have tested the PhoneShield on an old
analog cellular phone, and I can confirm that it works under those conditions.
I don't know whether it will work on pulsed digital devices, as I have not
tested it under those conditions.
In addition, Les Wilson of Microshield in the U.K. has sent me test materials
to evaluate the effectiveness of his device. I have read these reports from
independent testing labs (including evaluation by Alasdair Philips), and I
believe on the basis of these rep[orts that the device will work as intended
for the European GSM pulsed digital transmissions. Whether it will work at
the higher frequencies of U.S. PCS pulsed digital systems (TDMA and CDMA) I
can't say. Les has sent me one of the devices to test, but in order to do so,
I will have to fid a user who has a Nokia phone on one of the PCS pulsed
digital providers. I intend to do this, but I haven't done so yet.
Incidentally, please note that neither I nor EMR Network have any financial
interest in the success of any protective device manufacturer nor am I
receiving any compensation for my opinion.
Further, there is an ethical
dilemma involved in recommending the use of a protective device: encouraging
use of the protective device will probably benefit the users at the expense of
the helpless people who are exposed without consent to the malevolent effects
of the buildout of the pused digital communication systems. [AMEN, AMEN...
.....GURU..... ]
[!!!!!!!..... Bill is talking ABOVE about the "Blue World."....... It seems
to me that we do not emphasize enough the fact that these "exposure questions"
-- which ask WHAT DANGER AM I IN?? -- usually fail to embrace the "total
exposure effects upon society"....the Blue World...........guru......]
One cannot avoid
this dilemma. I have chosen to opt for protection of the health of
individuals whenever this can be accomplished. Accordingly, I will provide
informational ammunition to people who have to fight the encroachment of
telecom. company base stations into their personal lives, but I will also
encourage the development of effective protective devices for those who find
it necessary to use mobnile phones.
Roy Beavers wrote:
>
> ...........From EMF-L.........
>
> ...............guru's response to an often asked question.........
>
> Jane:
>
> The truth is -- we don't know..... Your husband and millions of
> others are guinea pigs in
> this..... What we DO have is a smattering of information that seems
> to prove that the
> cell phones are biologically active. And some (not enough)
> epidemiology that shows an
> association with some health symptoms -- ranging from tinnitus to
> cancer in seriousness.
> There is also a growing body of anecdotal evidence that should not be
> ignored!!!
>
> Whether or not the various mitigation devices (shields, etc.) will
> protect against the most
> serious consequences -- we just do not know ... yet....... The
> microshield device you
> mention is thought by some to be one of the more effective. But -- I
> stress -- we do not
> know, yet.... (Some of the gadgets that are being sold, in my
> opinion, are pure "snake oil.")
> The microshield approach, however, I believe, is a serious attempt to
> deal with the problem.
>
> Another serious attempt on your part is to urge your husband to
> minimize his use of
> the cell phone, and NOT use it in enclosed metallic environments --
> such as within an
> automobile.... (It is not a good idea to use it while driving in any
> case -- for other reasons.
> Some -- wiser and more prudent communities -- are beginning to outlaw
> the use of
> cell phones in automobiles.....) Also, consider the fact that many
> large office buildings are
> framed of steel and contain much metallic conduit, etc.....
>
> The bottom line is that -- your husband is a guinea pig...... And,
> our governments prefer
> that alternative to the other -- sharing the truth about the possible
> dangers with the public......
> We have seen recently in the U.S. that the U.S. government can "get
> tough" with the
> producers of genetic corn that may threaten public health..... I see
> absolutely NO
> DIFFERENCE between that case and the cell phone case -- except that
> the evidence
> of potential harm is much stronger in the cell phone
> instance!!!.......
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Roy Beavers (EMFguru).....(Signature line below.)
>
>
> Christian Vogelbach wrote:
>
> > Dear Roy,
> >
> > My name is Jane Byrnes and I live in Switzerland.
> > I am totally against the use of mobile telephones and am aware of
> > their
> > dangers. However my husband uses one for his business and declares
> > he
> > cannot do without it. Probably true, but... He has recently
> > developed a
> > whooshing in his ear - the one he always holds the phone to. Also
> > has no
> > energy and despite visits to all sorts of naturopaths etc, has had
> > little relief.
> >
> > I recently bought a guard for his phone - MICRO SHIELD - an English
> > company that I discovered on the net. The blurb on this thing says
> > that
> > independent tests by British Telecom have shown the shield to reduce
> >
> > microwave absorption by 99%. They quote other tests by a university
> > in
> > Australia and Moscow's Medical Acadamy.
> >
> > What I would like to know is - is it all true? Is this product
> > really
> > going to protect my husband from the harmful effects of using his
> > mobile
> > daily, possibly hourly??
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jane Byrnes janeb@bluewin.ch
>
> --
>
> Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
> roy@emfguru.com
>
> It is better to light a single candle
> than to curse the darkness.....
>
> WEBSITE: http://emfguru.com
>
> People are more important than profit$$
>
--
----
Bill P. Curry, Ph.D. |Physics is fun.
EMSciTek Consulting Co. |Trying to make a living!
22W101 McCarron Road, |Phone: (630) 858-9377
Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 |Fax: (630) 858-9159 with prior notice
Web page: http://www.EMSciTek.com
____________________________________________________
| Analysis, experiment design & software development |
| for engineering and the physical sciences |
----------------------------------------------------
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com