/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10176724]

Millimeter waves are bad for humans, likely lethal for smaller animals. Unfortunately unlike existing technologies (which are no better, see >>10174469) data on millimeter waves is comparatively sparse. But there are some clear trends.

The primary mechanism for existing microwave systems is increased free radical generation, changes in gene expression, and altered calcium flux. It's not known if millimeter waves work precisely the same way, but it is known:
-The structure of human sweat glands is a helical coil. When filled with sweat (a conductive salt solution) it turns out this is a quite functional antenna array for millimeter waves
-Once in the body attenuation is very low according to USSR literature. Millimeter waves propagate almost freely through the extracellular space, preserving in particular their "information" content. Structures in the body are capable of demodulating these signals.
-The structure of the plasma membrane changes in response, and maintains this change long after irradiation has ceased.
-It changes the structure of the skin, alters the blood, alters bone marrow and lymphatic function, cripples the immune system, prevents the production of vitamin D, and demyelinates nerves as well as rendering their axons fragmented. Yes, it strips off the insulation and chops up the wires. This was known decades ago. You can expect destruction of peripheral nerves and spinal ganglia.

Recently birds died in an area where 5G was being tested, I believe in the netherlands. I've been meaning to verify this more thoroughly but from what I know it doesn't surprise me. They died by the hundreds, their bodies looked pristine, the cause of death was internal hemorrhaging.
http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/hundreds-of-birds-dead-during-5g-experiment-in-the-hague-the-netherlands/236196

Sources below.

[Anonymous No.10176726]

https://ehtrust.org/letter-fcc-dr-yael-stein-md-opposition-5g-spectrum-frontiers/
https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell-phoneswireless/5g-networks-iot-scientific-overview-human-health-risks/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18517913

http://www.mediafire.com/folder/dj875cd10yb72/EMF
In this link, look at [Studies in Soviet science] Pathological effects of Radio waves[...].pdf
Read the section on low intensity millimeter waves. The other books in there are also informative.

And:
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp88b01125r000300120005-6
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00792r000100070001-9

[Anonymous No.10176735]

>>10176724
Why do threads around this topic get deleted? /10176045/ just got removed after i wrote a proper reply with quotes from scientific papers around the topic of EMF intensity/proximity and observed effects on lab animals.

[Anonymous No.10176832]

>>10176724

you realize that a normal house lamp produces more energy than 5G ?

[Anonymous No.10176875]

>>10176735
>Why do threads around this topic get deleted?
>>10176832
there is part of your answer, people in /sci/ doesn't even understand that the issue is not about energy but also about frequency.

[Anonymous No.10176914]

so what should I do personally?

[Anonymous No.10176977]

>>10176875

frequency does not cause cancer, energy does, and frequency is linked to energy inevitably in EM waves

[Anonymous No.10177009]

>>10176875
As far as we know, ionizing radiation is the main mechanism that interacts with biological functions. 5g isnt enough energy to interact. Your cells are damaged more by 10 minutes in the sun and by radical oxygen than by sitting next to a 5g source for years.

Its just like the claims of powerlines causing cancer in livestock, theres no explainable mechanism that would cause it using em theory. It's x tier voodoo, which is why it gets deleted.

[Anonymous No.10177018]

>>10176977
That would mean you are dead, just accept the fact, that different frequency acts differently on different thing it's going trough.

[Anonymous No.10177198]

>>10177009
It's well studied that 630-850 nm of light has several absorption peaks with regards to I think cytochrome C, producing a variety of beneficial effects, so your first statement is wrong. It's not thermal either, look up LLLT/red light therapy/dr michael hamblin/photobiomodulation.

[Anonymous No.10177273]

>>10176735
>scientific papers

Like these? Post if you have them. I've not gone over these fully and haven't double checked to see if they are still valid urls:

==============

Literature sources:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23802593
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26300312
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29573716
http://cyrusfarivar.com/docs/WiFi%20Health/EBBE-review.pdf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1482415

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8388394

http://www.mediafire.com/folder/dj875cd10yb72/EMF

Historical reviews, symposium proceedings, etc ^
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810017132.pdf

Irreversible infertility:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9261543

General theory:
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7521096402.pdf

In vivo DNA damage in humans:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29667447

Behavioral changes with prenatal exposure:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22428084

[Anonymous No.10177289]

>>10176735
>Why do threads around this topic get deleted? /10176045/ just got removed

Because it was a shit thread with a shit starting OP. That alone can make all the difference.

[Anonymous No.10177296]

>>10176724
I think we don't absorb waves of that lenght

[Anonymous No.10177352]

so now /sci/ has tooker, and this EMF spook. I wonder who’s next to come shit up our board?

[Anonymous No.10177359]

>>10177352
Well, at least flat earthers gave it a break.

[Anonymous No.10177388]

>>10177352
>>10177359
Flat earthers also don't have a bucket load of peer reviewed science papers to back them up either.

[Anonymous No.10177392]

>>10177388
>Science papers
Oh fuck off back to /g/, I remember you

[Anonymous No.10177398]

>>10176735
>Why do threads around this topic get deleted?
because you're a nutter

[Anonymous No.10177410]

>>10177009
while i have heard the same thing i wonder
-you mention radiation and exposure to sunlight, but some people and animals have an increased susceptibility to sun rays, like some medication will cause a photosensitivity.
-while there doesnt seem to be much of an explanation, people find that they are aversly affected by wifi and radio signals, think it causes headaches or something
-also not that in some form of psychosis and some psych meds can cause a hypersensitivity to sound.

so while im not totally disputing current understanding of radiation and shortwave EM . i wonder if there are any special cases where a person might become susceptible to said wavelengths?

[Anonymous No.10177429]

>>10177009
>As far as we know, ionizing radiation is the main mechanism that interacts with biological functions
This is the core misconception, and I think people don't realize that this argument has already played out well over 50 years ago, skepticism over non-thermal effects, for researchers who could accept what they were seeing, the kT paradox, ie how can a periodic signal (or continuous wave in some cases) well below the threshold of ambient thermal noise affect the behavior of cells. The answer is polarization, and structures designed to be resistant to random thermal noise but very sensitive to other stimuli, like the calcium channel's voltage sensor. Cells operate using non-ionizing radiation for signalling anyway, which is why periodic signals with a rapid rise time (pulses, used for digital communication) can be so active.

I don't have a lot of time at the moment. Refer to:
>>10174469
With the move to pulsed radiation much of the variation in reported phenomena and "specific effects" (calcium efflux from membrane bound glycoproteins, action on adenylate cyclase, etc) gave way to more generally consistent effects. Refer to the work of Carl Blackman, SM Bawin, Phllips, and WR Adey for more about the former, as well as the authors in the WHO sponsored warsaw symposium included in the mediafire link. Bawin's last paper on 1Hz magnetic fields particularly, which demonstrated the mere presence of NO in a chelated form in the extracellular space is enough to facilitate transduction, the cell seemingly does not need to be capable of manufacturing it. Unfortunately either something happened or she never secured further funding, because the plans for future research she mentioned aren't indexed anywhere and probably didn't happen.

For epidemiology which I haven't really included, refer to the work of Bruce Hocking, Lennart Hardell, Samuel Milham, and others.

I noticed the Warsaw symposium was missing some pages, so I'm reuploading it. Will take a bit.

[Anonymous No.10177435]

>>10177429
Wew lad

This is who you're talking to when you respond to a post talking about how microwave pulses/emf/rf/vlf/whatever is bad for you and will wreck your life through vgccs. The following posts outline one man's mental illness and egotistical delusions. It's pointless to argue with him.

IF YOU ONLY READ ONE LINK READ THIS ONE:
>>/sci/thread/S7412900#p7419557
He's a dumb tweaker who went nuts as a teenager and melted his brain with drugs afterwards.

>>/sci/thread/S6030054
Post from 2013 where he admits he knows doctors won't believe him.

>>/sci/thread/S7381438#p7384671
Here he is admitting he takes stimulants before posting.

>>/sci/thread/S7347630#p7350199
Admits to hallucinations

>>/sci/thread/S9039115#p9043898
He admits he's dumb as a box of rocks.

>>/sci/thread/S8205938#p8206096
Autistic textwall about how he's a clever superhuman with undiagnosed MS and self diagnosed bipolar and an insane skeleton

[Anonymous No.10177439]

>>/sci/thread/S9072343#p9072588
Goes on about smart meters, the evils of processed food, and how he's so unique among sheep.

>>/sci/thread/S7644877#p7651596

>>/sci/thread/S7644877#p7650927

>>/sci/thread/S6862166#p6862235
Gets told he's nuts by a doctor

>>/sci/thread/S8800448#p8806774
This speaks for itself
>>/sci/thread/S8369061#p8369080
I'm a special warrior pls stroke my ego

>>/sci/thread/S8339168#p8339266
This entire thread is him wigging out about how he's totally not insane and the evils of shrinks.

>>/sci/thread/S8322068#p8322156
Him going on about his genius again.

>>/sci/thread/S8261316#p8261569
>>/sci/thread/S8261316#p8261598
Protip: Don't constantly call people myopic if you want to remain anon.
Muh jaw problems muh nerve probems

>>/sci/thread/S8230504#p8245636
Spends half a thread freaking out about MUH JAW MUH SUPER HEALING MUH LOGIC and CT scans, plus some of his wacky medical adventures.

>>/sci/thread/S8219875#p8220852
He's some sort of genius philosopher.

>>/sci/thread/S7397504#p7397645
Arguing with doctors again since they don't agree with his self diagnosis.

>>/sci/thread/S8208158#p8208194
Muh logical framework cures acne

>>/sci/thread/S7355671#p7356297
All caps rage about how stoic he is, and how you don't see him doing exactly what his post says.

>>/sci/thread/S7530472#p7532449
Neurosurgeon pro

[Anonymous No.10177443]

>>/sci/thread/S9325159#p9329305
More mental issues

>>/sci/thread/S9327702#p9331355
Whining about neuralgia again, admits that he feels mentally impaired.

>>/sci/thread/S9981946#p9994713
Sperging out in /med/ general about how the WHO is lying

>>/sci/thread/S10030494#p10031782
>>/sci/thread/S10022822
He's a chemtrail conspiracy theorist too

>>/sci/thread/S9995735#p9995763
5G is an anti overpopulation killswitch

>>/sci/thread/S4345068#p4349402
Admits that he's given himself brain damage with drugs.
>>/sci/thread/S9277397#p9278603
Admits that he's a sperg with a bias against phone users.

>>/sci/thread/S10022822#p10022824
Probably chemtrail conspiracy theorist.

>>/sci/thread/S10023332#p10023581
Natural health word salad.

[Anonymous No.10177449]

>>10177435
I've gone through some of this poster's walls of links in the past and often 1/2+ aren't me, which is an unacceptably high error rate. More likely all that really counts is framing and establishing a core narrative.

[Anonymous No.10177457]

>>10177449
Sperg more lmao

[Anonymous No.10177484]

>>10177392
I don't go to /g/ and this thread already has a ton of posts with such papers. Read them. What is wrong with you?

>>10177435
There's more than one person posting that stuff, fyi.

[Anonymous No.10177486]

>>10176724
It wouldn't surprise me. Everyone though mobile phones were totally safe and anyone who talked about the radiofrequency radiation was called a conspiracy theorist.

Fast forward to right now and we have linked a certain type of breast cancer to women who put their phones inside their bras. I'm a nurse at a public hospital and we have a little sign at the reception informing women not to store their phones against their breasts.

[Anonymous No.10177489]

>>10177486
>I'm a nurse

[Anonymous No.10177495]

>being this retarded
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/5g-cellular-test-birds/

[Anonymous No.10177504]

hello anti-radiowave poster, what do you think about LLLT? I posted >>10177198, it's really a promising technology/technique and is basically part of the same phenomenon as your cause, although positive in this case.

[Anonymous No.10177512]

>>10177489
Hello sir, what ails you? :)

I work in critical care it's a very rewarding but emotionally challenging job. If you ever find yourself on deaths doorstep I'll be the one to make sure you don't go through that door :>

[Anonymous No.10177517]

>>10177512
>I'll be the one to make sure you don't go through that door :>
Nah brah it's fine

[Anonymous No.10177518]

>>10177495
Why call people retarded? This is /sci/ - science and math. Bringing more evidence to the table helps a lot. That is what you sorta did so that's a positive. Don't tarnish your contribution by calling people retarded.

>>10177486
Got a pic of that sign to post? Try not to get anything else identifiable around it or edit that out later prior to posting.

[Anonymous No.10177522]

>>10177512
How do you deal with "too many cooks in the kitchen?" That happens a lot in the local hospital here and it makes everything confusing. Information gets completely lost or gets to the physician too late.

[Anonymous No.10177523]

>>10177518
Nothing wrong with calling someone retarded that. It's just accurate.

[Anonymous No.10177528]

>>10177523
It belittles you.

[Anonymous No.10177535]

>>10177528
You prefer the newspeak "person with special needs"?

[Anonymous No.10177540]

>>10177535
You misunderstand. The slur, whatever it may be, belittles you and what information you present because you presented it in an offensive way.

[Anonymous No.10177543]

>>10177540
>retarded is a slur
>not a term describing a specific condition
Not sure if you aren't just low-key triggered right now

[Anonymous No.10177559]

>>10177543
I don't see what you mean.

[Anonymous No.10177563]

>>10177559
well maybe I'll give you some time to catch up

[Anonymous No.10177566]

>>10177563
>>10177523
>>10177535
>>10177543
Now that everyone has seen what type of person posted >>10177495 we can safely say that "snopes" is a website for retards. Which is quite a tragic irony.

[Anonymous No.10177690]

Cross-thread post relevant to the topic

>>10177684

[Anonymous No.10177697]

>>10177566
A website which creates retards* FTFY

It's not that they're bad fact checkers, simply bought off and completely one-sided on various controversial, politically sensitive topics.

[Anonymous No.10178314]

Yeah they're slowly killing us and what are you going to do about it?

[Anonymous No.10178811]

>>10177697
>It's not that they're bad fact checkers
They are though. I lost all faith in them when I debunked something for them and they took the credit.