Los Alamos National Labs is often associated with bombs, and the one it dropped today is no less likely to stir up a firestorm. Figuratively speaking, of course. That simmering controversy surrounding cell phone signals' effect on biological tissue surfaced again today via a Los Alamos researcher who says the microwaves emitted by cell phones can interact with human tissues in an entirely new way that has yet to be taken into account.
There are obviously two sides to the debate here, one that cites evidence showing that cell phone signals have been shown to influence human behavior and health, and the other which claims that epidemiological evidence shows no indication that cell phone signal exposure correlates to the aforementioned health effects.
But the particularly potent argument for cell phone safety is that microwave photons don't have enough energy to break chemical bonds. And if they can't break chemical bonds, then they can't damage biological tissues. For many physicists, this is case closed.
Bill Bruno, theoretical biologist at Los Alamos, says otherwise. If you want to get into the nitty-gritty science of it, there's a link to his paper at the bottom of this post. But the basic argument is this: the traditional idea that microwaves aren't strong enough to affect human tissues only applies when the number of photons in a space equivalent to a cubic wavelength is less than one. When the density is higher, photons can interfere constructively--that is, the effects can compound and interact in stronger ways than they normally could.
Bruno cites optical tweezers as an example. We know that optical tweezers, which use photons to manipulate very small objects like cells, can do damage to structures. That's well documented. And that's because the photons are piled on--the more photons, the stronger the force (and the more potential damage).
Optical tweezers work in the infrared generally, but it raises questions about whether the same is true of photons in the microwave range because one thing is clear: the density of photons per cubic wavelength in cell signals is many orders of magnitude greater than one. So, Bruno says, there is a mechanism by which damage could occur, and the conditions for that mechanism to work are present around cell phones and cell towers.
Now, this doesn't mean that microwave photons are necessarily scrambling your neurons, but it does add another wrinkle to the debate and is cause for concern and further evaluation. At the very least, Bruno says the argument that microwaves can't achieve the strength to break chemical bonds is no longer enough to discount the idea that cell phones are harmful to biological tissue.
Consider this controversy far from resolved. The full paper is available here.
I have been saying cell phone effect people for years. Walk down a semi-crowded street or though a mall without one and watch those around you. They won't even notice you if they are on the phone, bumping into you, knocking into you and such. Better yet watch the video of the lady walking into a fountain in the mall on Utube again.
Sorry but I think you've taken the idea that cell phones affect peoples behavior one step to far. There is no way that the signals from cell phones will make people that rude or unaware of there surroundings...in reality it's just a biproduct of them concentrating on their conversation and as a result ignoring the world around them. And if this isn't the case then the person is just plain rude, by no means can I believe that behavior has anything to do with the signals.
CORRECTION: And if this isn't the case then the person is just plain rude, by no means can I believe that THIS behavior has anything to do the signals***
The fungus affecting bats has occurred since the proliferation of cellular towers. Their sonar tissues are sensitive! I'm willing to give up my cell phone to save the bats.
Sarcasm appears to be useless here caradoc01.
@odavy, Electromagnetic radiation should have no affect on sonar-based sense, in EXACTLY the same way that flashing a torch at your ear doesn't have an impact on your hearing. Cell phone tower emissions in the microwave section of the electromagnetic spectrum are still solely within the EM spectrum, whilst sonar is, by it's very nature, purely sound-based.
The truth is we don't know if cell phones affect us or not. By the time someone can prove they do, it will be too late. It'll be like the smokers, they know what they're doing is killing them but they do it anyway. I can see it now, "Surgeon generals warning: Cell phone use causes (insert detriment here)". Could we really give up our cell phones even if there was incontrovertible proof they caused us harm?
Every 3, 6 months or so, the same old conversation comes up about the possible damage of cell phone. I like seeing the conversation of the subject. Nobody wants to be harmed by cell phone. But, I always marvel how everyone ignores the elephant in the room.
The thing is, cell phones transmit power is in the milliwatts or pica watts. It’s incredibly small. But it's the frequency of the cell phones transmitting, which allows it to penetrate and do cellular damage. Now let me repeat, the wattage is in the milliwatts or pica watts; it's tiny.
So here is the deal, no comments or government investigation is ever done on the hand held radios. Thousands of company, industries, business, government departments and agencies use these things. These radios transmit too in the UHF or VHF frequencies. This is close and very similar to the cell phones. Now here is the big deal part, they transmit in the WATTS. I have a Motorola hand held radio on my desk that I know transmits 5 WATTS. Many other hand held radios transmitter much higher. As I speak into this radio, there is that antenna, right next to my head.
It seems our government continues to show a blinds eye to this technology...... why? Its just so odd the way this ignored?
Cause most people don't have a radio transmitter, but they do have a cell phone.
ALWAYS REMEMBER: A CELLPHONE IS A 2-WAY MICROWAVE RADIO...
T-MOBILE'S OWN RESEARCH SAYS, "Given the results of the present epidemiological studies, it can be concluded that electromagnetic fields with frequencies in the mobile telecommunications range do play a role in the development of cancer." (See p37,: www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/ecolog2000.pdf )
CELLPHONE RADIATION DAMAGES DNA, AN UNDISPUTED CAUSE OF CANCER: www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/march05/wakeupcall01.html
MALE FERTILITY IS DAMAGED BY CELLPHONE RADIATION: www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(07)00332-9/abstract
CELLPHONE RISK TO PREGNANT WOMEN, BABIES: www.timeslive.co.za/local/article899651.ece/Cellphones-a-threat-to-unborn-babies
CELLPHONE CALLS ALTER BRAIN ACTIVITY, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH SCIENTISTS SAY: www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/22/cell-phone-calls-alter-brain-activity-scientists-say/#ixzz1IJxewVtk
60% OF INSURANCE INDUSTRY WILL NOT INSURE CELLPHONE INDUSTRY: www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV_Shows/The_National/ID=1596918361
i find it annoying..there has been lots of speculations and debates abt the radiation effect...why don't scientists do few control experiments, where they can expose some animals with higher and longer dose of the same radiation...that would give a clue...
I do not have a cell-phone and probably never will,and live rurally away from towers.So when you all lose your brains to decades long exposure, those of us that never were exposed will rule the earth!So ,by all means, answer that call...
In my AP Physics class we learned that electromagnetic waves can interfere constructively, but an increase in amplitude of an electromagnetic wave only increases intensity and does not increase the amount of energy possessed by the wave. Is this article saying that when there are many waves close to each other then they can interfere constructively?
If wireless has no effect then how come!
Electro-sensitive people suffer from a variety of symptoms in close vicinity to electromagnetic fields, Wi-fi, mobiles, DECT phones, baby monitors, certain light sources etc: Headaches, Speech problems, dizziness, chest palpations, tinnitus, sweating at night. skin irritations, pins and needles in the hands in the mornings, short-term memory loss, nauseas, joint aches and pressures at the back of the head as well as in the sinus or forehead area.
Even if you are not ES, it is beneficial to turn off your Wifi over night, as well as to ban electrical items, your cordless phones and mobiles from your bedroom. You will sleep much better and are less likely to have an interrupted sleep pattern. Usually waking around 4 am.
Another simple test is to stop carrying your mobile on your body (chest or trouser pockets). in many cases people experience the so-called “phantom text messages”. This describes a situation where every now and then you think you had a text message, when keeping the phone in your pockets, but when you checked there was no message. Some even suffer from heart palpitations. If that is case, just try for a while to carry your mobile in a bag or switch it off, while you have it in your pocket.
If you want to find out more:
magdahavas com (Canadian website)
Yes. Cellphones affect human behavior. That's why drivers using their cellphones have a higher risk of getting into a car accident.
Other than that, cellphone or microwave signals affecting human behavior is just plain stupidity. We're bombarded everyday by all forms of radiation after all.
It's really too bad that research/acceptance always comes after damage has been done to people's health (consider Semmelweis who angered the establishment medical community when suggesting that surgeons should wash their hands between surgery). Science is supposed to open new doors, not slam them shut when mainstream scientists don't agree. Bruno's research should, at the very least, be further studied.
Most of us are ignorant to the facts because the interactions with our biology are more complex than you would think. In regards to the bats, to say that only sound can have an effect on the bats sensory organs is to disregard the fact that all sensory modalities of living creatures involve transduction of one signal type (e.g optical, acoustic, thermal, mechano,chemo), from our environment into electromagnetic nerve impulses. Besides this EM fields can induce mechanical strain in biological tissue through electro/magnetostrictive forces generated across the complex nonhomogeneous dielectrics of living tissue. All forces are in reality not seperate but interlinked in ways that are actually very useful to our sciences.To the contrary of what you are saying about behavior not being effected except through secondary effects such as attention deficits, microwaves are actually one of the best mediums for complete overhaul of behavior when pulsed or time varied in just the way they are in telecom applications, entrainment of impulses across nervous ensembles occurs because of the steep variation in amplitude lowering thresholds, transmembrane excitation of of sodium and calcium ions which are the main mechanism of neural signal transduction. More specific behavioral modification can occur when the pulsed microwave is modulated by ELF signal content which happens to be the natural mode of nervous activity. Believe it or not direct transfer of potentials into the brain which can be indistinguishable from internally generated potentials is very effeciently done by a pulsed microwave carrier. This is what can be refered to as direct neural stimulation. A more referenced mode of interference with the senses occurs from tiny thermal expansion of brain tissue(induced mechanical strain)which if encoded with voice modulation can travel to the cochlea and interact just like acoustic pressure waves with the basilar mem. and stereocilia transducing the pressure into neural pulse along the 8th cranial nerve and into the auditory cortex.This mechanism may be what is effecting your bats.Free radicals are created in tissue by pulsed EM which can age you prematurely and increase cancer rates. mitotic rates of cancer have been observed to increases significantly when the time varying microwaves mix with staedy state fields generated by low frequency power lines and interact with the tissues. This could be a source of interferometric effects described by the article. We are all be poisened no doubt and to make the mistake that the gov. cares is actually laughable. I would be more inclined to believe you if you told me the gov. was using the ubiqutious presence of microwave emitters and the ignorance of the population to engineer bio/behavioural effects on the unwitting cell phone addict. Thats just opinion though. ;)