What is Digg?41 Comments
- Serinox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+36i would die if i couldn't use a computer :(
- jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14He should move to a desert island or idaho.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=idaho_blows - IHatePants, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10OK, so I'm not saying that it's all in his head, but what strikes me as odd every time I hear about one of these cases is that they never had any problems with other EM sources beforehand, especially ones in the same frequency range with much higher wattage.
Example, this guy claims that he had to quit his job at a furniture store when they installed a wireless network, and other people claim they have problems caused by cell phones. Both of these types of devices operate in the UHF range (300MHz - 2483MHz).
If you can plug in rabbit ears to your TV and get a signal, then you are being bombarded with UHF signals right now (in the 470-806MHz range), and probably at much higher wattage than the signal being put out by that little WiFi device. Your normal WiFi access point puts out around 1-4 watts. Your average broadcast TV station puts out around 250-750 watts, if I remember correctly. If 1 watt from a WiFi access point hurts this guy, he must nearly die if he goes within 10 miles of a TV station's antenna.
OK, granted, the Wifi is probably at 2.4 ghz, so it might be frequency dependent. But I remember hearing these kinds of claims back when mobile phones were analog, and they had a frequency that was only a few MHz above the broadcast TV spectrum.
Again, not saying they're making it up, or that it's all in their heads, but it does seem odd that the only fields they claim are hurting them are the ones they see sitting right in front of them. - Blisshead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I did read the Wiki article, and it said they have not been able to prove jack other than that the people are suffering from something in double blind testing. It seems this is most likely best treated by a psychologist rather than a physician, at least until actual proof is found. Not to take away from any ones suffering, mental illness is very serious as well.
- davodavo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13You're retarded.
- celotil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8It's an interesting idea that computers, television, microwaves, phones, and other electronic devices are affecting people but so far the few double-blind tests I've read about have shown that the majority of people who complain about being affected by electromagnetic fields don't consistantly know when such a field is activated nearby.
Instead of linking to one or two cases, here is my search from Google,
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=electromagnetic+double-blind+test&btnG=Search&meta=
It seems that in some very rare cases, certain people can be hypersensitive to EM fields, but there's no definite proof one way or the other so people will be arguing over this for quite a while I suppose.
I find that in some lighting conditions, "soft" light (minimal shadows) from fluorescent bulbs that is shielded behind diffusing covers gets me down, but I think that's basically just the dead appearance it gives everything.
I have two fluorescent bulbs in my bedroom, a 20 watt overhead, and a 5 watt bedside light that is used most (throws off a yellow light that is just like a really bright candle) and I have no problem with these. In my old apartment I had a low wattage bar fluorescent in the ceiling between the small kitchen-dining area and that threw off a relatively "hard" light (defined shadows) and that light was used most of the time since I had my desk in the dining half of the room. No problem with that one either.
Could some of this EM hyper-sensitivity be purely a psycho-somatic reaction of fear towards becoming ill from electronic gadgets and gizmos? Maybe, but we don't know that for sure so it would be silly for people to automatically disregard another person's claims that televisions, computers, and other such devices cause them pain or discomfort.
A person who thinks that EM fields hurt them probably _is_ in pain or discomfort, but if their mind is set on believing it is from EM fields and not some other cause, then they'll likely not be dissuaded from abandoning electronic toys and gizmos.
I'm willing to bet that even if someone had a mobile phone, a laptop, or some other such device hidden about their person, and visited someone who said that they were EM sensitive and _didn't_ immediately react when their friend was within a few metres would, even if their friend kept the device hidden for a couple of hours, immediately claim that they were feeling sick after the discovery of the device, and probably even claim they'd always felt sick as soon as their friend had been nearby and "knew" that said device was there all along.
This doesn't neccessarily mean that such a device isn't causing the complainant any pain, but I think that it's a sure bet that the pain is likely to be psychological, not physical.
Why would someone have irrational fear of computers and televisions and other such devices? How many stories have you seen on the news, heard on the radio, and read in the papers about EM fields, not in the part of the spectrum related to ultraviolet light, causing cancer, brain tumours, even "sunburn"?
There was chart on the wall in one of the classrooms I attended biology classes in at high school. It was a wavelength chart, starting at one end with ultra-long wave radio, and showing all the main types of wavelengths up to gamma rays. I found it particularly interesting at the time because although I sort of knew about it, I'd never really thought about the fact that the light you can see is the same thing as the radio waves your stereo picks up to deliver Classic Jazz, or whatever.
It's also basically the same thing as the electricity running your PC that you're reading Digg with right now. It's purely energetic levels of differing strengths of radiation.
Like I said, EM hyper-sensitivity is an interesting idea, but I'm going to wait for more studies to be done before I either believe in it or dismiss it. For now I'll simply respect the fact that someone may, for whatever rational or irrational reasons, ask me not to bring my mobile phone or some other device near them, and I will aquiesce to this request by simply avoiding that person in the future (damn it, I _need_ to keep in contact 24/7 ;). - Apreche, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7At the present time I refuse to believe that EHS is real. Blindfold one of these people and sit them down in a room. Then turn a wireless access point in the room on and off. Make sure you plug their ears, just in case it makes noise when you flick the switch. See if they can tell when the WAP is on or off. I bet a fist full of dollars they can't. It's a psychosematic response. These people needs psychologists and psychiatrists, not farraday cage armor.
- paperface, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@masamunecyrus: That wikipedia article you posted cites that in 31 experiments it has been difficult to link hypersensitivity to EMF exposure in blind cases. This strongly points to it being a psychological problem and not a physical phenomenon.
- icepick314, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7i hear that aluminum foil hats re coming back in style...
- biometricks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6And I thought my parents were embarrassing...
Hey, what's your dad doing with the binoculars? Oh, he's just reading his email... - Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I'm assuming this means he can't be exposed to light, heat, microwaves, UV, X-rays or gamma rays.
Whatever you say. - poipoipoi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5...and needs to hope he isn't allergic to the transporter... >_<
maybe he should just give it up and go do a Grizzly Adams. - zumbojo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This guy must not know what the static on his television is.
Shouldn't this guy be in constant, searing pain due to the hojillion different types of very powerful background radiation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation
(He needs a goooood, long psych-consultation.) - masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It seems to me that a better solution would be to have a plain keyboard and ballmouse (infrared mouse may affect his health) hooked up to a computer, via extension cords, somewhere across the room, or in another room. Then, he could get a projector and place it decently far away and display the screen on a wall next to him.
At least, that's what I'd do. I can't imagine a plain keyboard and ballmouse causing EHS. - Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5For someone with EHS (which I'd never even heard of before until now), it must really suck to live in the modern age. There's really no avoiding it completely; this guy almost needs to be transported back to, like, 1850.
- martalli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Power lines and telephone lines are so, 19th century. This sounds more like an Onion article. I'm sure that this allergy of his would clear up with a little rispersdal (for psychosis).
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Heh. Last time I read that article, those studies weren't there.
*slithers away in shame* - masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5While it is strange, little is known about it to make it NOT strange. However, it is known that some people can be more sensitive to electromagnetic energy than others. Some people have personality changes, adverse health effects, or the feeling that they're not alone. It's because of this that most good ghost hunting teams always check for a high presence of electromagnetic energy, caused by faulty or old wiring, or perhaps a circuit breaker box, in places or rooms that people believe are haunted.
One example of this is TAPS (Trans-Atlantic Paranormal Society) -- they have a show, "Ghost Hunters," on the Sci-fi Channel -- was investigating an old house where a couple had recently moved, and ever since they moved, the husband would get very violent and confused when he was in the basement. TAPS brought their Electromagnetic Field meter to the house and found EMF spikes of over 200 (a normal spike is around 4) in the basement, caused by bad wiring and shielding in a circuit breaker. - skinwill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Dude, try 5000kW for an "average" station in Iowa.
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?list=0&facid=35096
If a half a watt from an access point is going to bother someone, and maybe 5 watts from a cell phone tower, you would think 5 MILLION watts from a tv station would be noticed...
These people are quacks. - farrellj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Maybe he had a "Press Enter..." moment?
This does bring a new meaning to "Tin Foil Hat"!
Poor guy!
ttyl - foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3HOW MANY TIMES do I have to TELL you guys....
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/3906c0f98d07b010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html
Tin Foil/ Aluminum Foil hats HELP the government to read your mind!
This is a reply to icepick314 and farrellj and all those tinfoil comments - celotil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Addendum: I'm going to have to write these sorts of things beforehand, covering a wide range of topics, in order to post quickly and avoid being redundant by the time I hit submit. :)
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Or Wyoming. Wyoming doesnt exist....
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10@CiXeL:
You, sir, are one of the reasons that so little progress has been made in this field. Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity is a real phenomena. It's not an allergy of electromagnetic energy, it's the ~hypersensitivity~ of it. At least go read Wikipedia before posting your uninformed elitist jargon around here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivity - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I wonder if this "allergy" coincides with technology phobia and ignorance. Where's the well versed technology expert who developed this "allergy?"
I mean, there are obvious effects that happen being near heat and radon sources. That's not an allergy, that's a common environmental risk. - poipoipoi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1with a poor sense of humor no less. :p
- poipoipoi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1flourescent lights aren't bad for ther EM fields or whatever; they're jsut bad because the light they give off makes one's eyes ache (its got something to do with teh wavelengths i reckon).
gimme a nice incandescent bulb anyday. [/offtopicness] - dontbejack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Maybe all the crazy electromagnetic waves in the air enable the feds to read your mind, man!
- pritch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2With any sort of electromagnetic radiation, the wattage is only part of the story. Power levels decrease with distance, according to an inverse square law. That is to say that if you're twice the distance I am from an antenna, you'll receive quarter the exposure that I do. Therefore, I'm actually receiving more radiation from the low power radio devices in the room with me now (wifi, mobile phone) than I am from the high powered TV transmitter a few miles away.
- MrZop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I guess i'll be the first to make a scrubs related hairnet joke.
- etjazz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1at least they have an online website were they can discuss their illness
http://www.electrosensitivity.org.uk/
i wonder if that site gets any hits at all! - phenolholic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1in darwin's evolutionary theory, these people wouldve been weeded out from the human population as it advanced over time.
- Anpheus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Thankfully, he doesn't have to not use a computer, EHS is similar to, if not identical to, Multiple-Chemical Sensitivity.
Nobody knows what specifically causes either, and the people making money off of it by selling books or managing various groups or selling various products seem to have absolutely no incentive to figure out why these people are suffering.
I wonder why they do that? - derwarnochfrei, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0now after about 20 years of research in that directions we have literally hundreds of studies, but no real evidence besides 2 effects: the heat effect and the effect on melatonine. the sun has an effect on both, too.. well its up to anyone to say that the sun is good and electrosmog is bad. science does not weigh but tell what was found. and placebo effect could be proved. what you believe as an effect. i believe this man feeling bad but i dont believe it is EM.
As it is impossible to disprove that there is thought reading or a god, the discussion will continue forever. i thing this is a "fashion" thing, sorry folx.
the critics who think all the studies are "bought" from industry fail mostly to say where are the faults in the studies. anyone can publish that via internet and then anyone else could check.
what normally happens is that one scientific group finds an evidence, mostly very feeble, but OK, evidence. but when the experiment is repeated by another group they dont find the same. science begins when something can be repeated. so we have either no evidence or we dont have the correct model for EM effects yet...
i feel sort of sad that some people fight for their lives against effects which we dont know weheras they dont fight against effects which have been 100 times proven. lets not only talk about nicotine, but lack ofg motion, softeners in plastics, dissolvants etc... the problem of nuclear waste..
just my 0,02 EUR.. :) - steelmaverick, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Maddox ftw.
- r00tus3r, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8I like how half wits like Cixel come on digg and proclaim that things are 'impossible', without having half a clue of what they're talking about. Well, you say it's 'impossible', brilliant, I guess that settles it then. ***** moron, when will people learn that there is so much about our world and ourselves that we don't understand, that it makes one seem incredibly ignorant to make statements such as the one made by Cixel.
- siMac, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5I'm allergic to cats, are you saying it's all in my head?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1You think thats bad? Im an Amish software developer.
- CiXeL, on 10/12/2007, -17/+13its like people who are psychologically allergic to cats. its impossible to be allergic to magnetic fields. you give off one yourself. thats like being allergic to water.
- bkemper, on 10/12/2007, -17/+11These nuts just need a good psychologist.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1digg this down
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is