- Forums - Sign Up - Reply - Search - Statistics -
www.mast-victims.org forum / General discussion / Microwave energy incarnted as autism (heres why)
Author Message
Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 22:16 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


-MOD DELETE-

Evidence is needed I agree.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:03
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

While your time and energy spent on this forum is of course appreciated, and usually we wouldn't discourage input into the debate - but I'll have to ask you to stop trying to be an expert on things you obviously don't grasp. You're getting completely basic things, completely wrong. Most of your above post is downright nonsense.

Just for example, you write:

"Microwaves seek to be bound to an object and this act is manipulated by engineers to get a desired result."

What? No. "Microwaves" is simply a term for electromagnetic radiation oscillating within a particular range of the radiofrequency spectrum. Its just energy, propagating, with no need to be "bound to an object" or anything.

"Maybe modulation techniques serves to keep the microwaves in suspense, to not let them bind"...

Huh? No. "Modulation" is simply a term for how a carrier wave is changed over time in order to represent information.

"Life seeks equilibrium (just like a microwave) and the autistic child is a living microwave molecule."

????! If you've somehow discovered a "Microwave molecule" then you better call Nature asap. Only joking. Don't.

I could go on.

Really. Please stop it.

But please do continue to ask questions.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:14 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


They don't know why microwave energy is here though?

Isn't there correlation between mobile phones and autism?

EDIT: I am not holding ground here and I am willing to accept my stupidity but my intrigue into the nature of this subject is higher than scientific material at times.

EDIT: I have given a edit on the main thread to outline the speculation and principle behind the nature of my thread. I agree it is extreme.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:30
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

I wasn't disputing a correlation between microwave radiation and autism, for which the biophysical evidence has been reviewed by, for example, Dr. Martha Herbert (here and here), Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy (here) and others.

I'm objecting to your descriptions of the technical/scientific terms and ideas about microwaves. They are nonsense.

PS: Operative word: evidence.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:32 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


Ok I am going to take this thread down. I agree its odd without evidence.

But I shall continue anyway (off forum) until like you say. Evidence.

Ok I will explore your links.

Thanks.

Do you know the difference between microwave emissions of a star and a phone mast or are they the same?

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:37
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

Absolutely, continue. There is no intention here for impeding your inquiry.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:41 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,Absolutely, continue. There is no intention here for impeding your inquiry.

I greatly agree with you, I haven't grasped anything on the subject to a level am comfortable with. I just wish to seek relieve from a easy solution to living near this awful technology.

I went against my own intuition and to be honest It hurts me to expose myself like that anyway and I don't wish to take away the seriousness of the subject.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 29 Aug 2016 23:57
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

"Do you know the difference between microwave emissions of a star and a phone mast or are they the same?"

Cosmic microwave emissions in the frequency band used for telecommunications is very little. For example at 1800 MHz its only 0.00000000001 microWatt/m2 and 0.000001 across the whole RF spectrum (source).

A phone mast will easily expose you to hundreds of microWatt/m2, even at considerable distance.

Look, this is not about hurting anyone's feelings. I got things wrong in the beginning. Of course. This is a very deep and complicated subject, but I've had amazing mentors who've helped me understand. Look and learn.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:01 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


"Cosmic microwave emissions in the frequency band used for telecommunications is very little. For example at 1800 MHz its only 0.00000000001 microWatt/m2 (source).A phone mast will easily expose you to hundreds of microWatt/m2, even at considerable distance.

I never knew this fact in this detail.

Thanks, that is alarming.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:11
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

The cosmic radiation levels are what all life has evolved to cope with. In fact its the only known safe/hygienic level.

You can see how quickly the scientific evidence of biological effects has progressed by looking at the biologically based exposure guidelines over time.

For example:

BioInitiative 2007: 1000 microWatt/m2
(source: here note: see SECTION 1: SUMMARY FOR THE PUBLIC AND CONCLUSIONS 2007)

Seletun Scientific Panel 2010: 170 microWatt/m2 (sources: here and here)

BioInitiative 2012: 3 - 6 microWatt/m2
(source: here note: see SECTION 1: SUMMARY FOR THE PUBLIC AND CONCLUSIONS 2014)

Those levels were derived by identifying lowest levels at which detrimental biological effects were scientifically documented and then factoring in a safety margin.

Note: here's advice on converting between measurement units.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:20 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


The cosmic radiation levels are what all life has evolved to cope with. In fact its the only known safe/hygienic level.

You can see how quickly the scientific evidence of biological effects has progressed by looking at the biologically based exposure guidelines over time.

For example:

BioInitiative 2007: 1000 microWatt/m2

Seletun Scientific Panel 2010: 170 microWatt/m2

BioInitiative 2012: 3 - 6 microWatt/m2

Those levels were derived by identifying lowest levels at which detrimental biological effects were scientifically documented and then factoring in a safety margin.


That is really amazing. Thanks for the share.

It is really good to see and the first time I have gained hope on this subject.

My bedroom is on average 2 mW/m2 that is 2000 microwatt!

Near my window it is 6-100 mW/m2 that is on average 45,000 microwatt near the window!

Do you reckon if this guideline will be lowered again? Are there still negative biological effects to be seen with the new guidelines? I believe so myself.

EDIT: my room measurements are in mill watt and I converted them to microwatt.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:29
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

You need to shield - at least - your bedroom. Those levels are way above recommendations for sleeping quarters (preferrably < 10 microWatt/m2).

Its certainly possible that new biological evidence will require a futher reduction of the guidelines.

Your window levels suggest that you live close to a phone-mast or other source of microwave radiation.

What gear was used to measure those levels?

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:29 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


I am really frightened by your bioinitiative links.

Being in such high doses.

It talks about evidence for human cognition retardation (basically).

About reaction times being negatively effected. I feel this everyday and I feel like I am adopting it to my personality in some way.

It just feels the government thinks its safe because I am still alive and not suffering physical pain. But instead I have protein expression issues, immune issues, cancer likelihood, neurological damage, stress etc.

I feel rudely awakened by these studies. I am not sure what to do. I can only go live with my mother to get away from this exposure. I am loosing life and function.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:32 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


I used the Cornet ED 88T EMF meter


http://www.electricsense.com/10786/cornet-ed88t-emf-meter/

The phone mast is 30 meters from my bedroom window, my neighbours kids bedrooms are 15-20 meters from it. Our bedrooms face it.

It is one of these horrible things:

http://pedroc.co.uk/Monopoles/multiop.JPG

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:36
Reply 


PHE got back to me regarding that the government research is sound on its safety guidelines or something.

They are little bit too relaxed on this aren't they?

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:38
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

My take on it is that your body can take quite a bit of radiation abuse as long as you:

- get proper sleep (produce melatonin/sleep-hormone which is a super-potent anti-oxidant)

- maintain good anti-oxidant levels through healthy diet (and possibly supplements).

In my opinion, the evidence is strongest for oxidative-stress damage - which can be counteracted with anti-oxidants like vitamin C and E as has been shown in animal studies to protect (sources: here, here, here and here)

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:44
Reply 


Jonnyloosegain,

"PHE got back to me regarding that the government research is sound on its safety guidelines or something. They are little bit too relaxed on this aren't they?"

PHE's guidelines are strictly thermal, meaning that if the radiation doesn't heat you at least 1 degree celcius within 6 minutes of exposure, they consider it safe. They do not protect against non-thermal biological effects.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:47
Reply 


I am very appreciative of your advice. It seems really bang on.

Is melatonin really that powerful then? Wow.

Are blueberries a good source of anti-oxidants?

If it can protect me and stave of cancer and other things than great!

Those study finds are astounding. How you found them is also amazing.

Do you feel even with good diet and sleep that a reduction in the quality of life still remains with this high dosage? Will it stop effect our interaction with the environment? Since the environment is effected whether we are protected or not.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 30 Aug 2016 00:50 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


PHE's guidelines are strictly thermal, meaning that if the radiation doesn't heat you at least 1 degree celcius within 6 minutes of exposure, they consider it safe. They do not protect against non-thermal biological effects.

That is exactly why I find their guidelines annoying, how they ignore the non-thermal side of it.

The negative effects from the non-thermal side is not hammered home to them enough I feel. Or at least this is where they are being naughty, in their ignorance of non-thermal effects.
They obviously know its the nail in the coffin for their business ventures so I feel, when they accept the negative non-thermal side of it.

EDIT: I am taking some vitamin C right now in the form of a smoothie :).

Ann
# Posted: 5 Sep 2016 21:13
Reply 


Jonny,
I would move if I were you. I know it is easy said than done but life is too short to fight this.
I wrote to the PHE some time ago and they were completely dismissive.
Have you noticed that there has been a bit more in the papers about this recently? but only very much in passing they mentioned mobile phones etc. as a cause of cancer in children hidden among pollution, chemicals etc.
It is very worrying that cancer is increasing in children and no one cares.

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 5 Sep 2016 21:46
Reply 


Ann is right about moving.

I know Jonny doesn't always get everything right, but he is looking for the truth and for answers to this evil, and that's always to be applauded.

EG.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 11 Sep 2016 12:58
Reply 


Thanks Ann and Eric.

Your concern is appreciated.

Yeah I get a lot of things wrong haha but yes thanks for that eric.

A quick question, can you guys hear any high frequency noise from the cell phone towers or is that just my tinnitus?

ann
# Posted: 12 Sep 2016 13:36
Reply 


If you live so close to a mast it is not surprising you hear noises. I made measurements from a mast and it is about 200metes before the reading reduces and actually 300metres before it is background reading.

Jonnyloosegain
Member
# Posted: 18 Sep 2016 19:52 - Edited by: Jonnyloosegain
Reply 


That is bad Ann.

EDIT: This image evokes a lot of emotions from me, I can almost feel the most discomforting feelings from it:

https://i.imgsafe.org/f05e50bdff.jpg

I know it first hand.

Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Underlined Style  Image Link  URL Link 

» Username  » Password 
You can post anonymously by entering a nickname with no password (if that nickname has not been taken by another member) or by leaving both fields empty. If you have an account you can also log in from this page without posting a message.
 

These forums are running on bulletin board script miniBB™ © 2001-2022