Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 2

[rincon]

@rincon Everyone should be anti-science when RADIATION comes into play. And vaccines are nothing like radiation.

More than 240 scientists who conducted research regarding electromagnetic fields unanimously agree there should be stricter exposure limits.

RADIATION comes from the sun. The electromagnetic spectrum cover 25 order of magnitude of frequency. We should really just build thick walls with no windows and live in underground caves because visible light is RADIATION and is orders of magnitude more energetic than the waves used for telecommunication. Of course that wouldnt make sense, because we know better

Being anti-science is not being anti radiation (like light) or anti-technology, is being anti the scientific method. You are choosing to ignore the studies that we have on electromagnetism to suit your agenda. Scientific studies tell us which frequencies are, and aren't, safe to use. That's why we know about radiation in the first place, and how we know the difference in ionizing (the bad one you associate with the word RADIATION) and non-ionizing (the one we use to communicate) radiation.

To say there aren't studies on 4G because "have a guess why" is absurd. Of course there are plenty of studies on it, and on electromagnetism as a whole. The results from these experiments are analyzed to determine what is and isn't safe to use. Simply choosing to discard findings is the problem.

Every single body in the universe that has energy emits radiation, from yourself to you table, or the bed you sleep on. Luckily people study these things so we know the different effects of radiation at different frequencies (energy).

Non-ionizing doesnt mean non-harmful... Low dosages and no long-term exposure are key, also DIRECT vs NON-DIRECT. Sun (UV radiation) is low dosage unless you stand around in the sun basically 24/7. If radiation is aimed directly at you, it will have effects even in low dosages given there is long-term exposure (which is guaraanted with telecommunication). So a lot depends whether it is focused on you or not.
"MmWave  cause radiation energy to focus in one or certain directions, leading  to increased heating if the main beam points to  the human  body. Thus,all possible pointing directions of the antenna arrays should be considered to ensure  safety, and perhaps a peak value should be used. Moreover, transmission with different  amplitude  and  phase  combinations  in  the adaptive array may result in the creation of constructive/destructive electrical field interference patterns inside the body"

At higher frequencies, surface layers of the skin are also increasingly affected.

It won't kill us all but any concerns are certainly warranted and being anti-science is a stupid accusation in this affair. We are definitely entering a new territory here.

Questioning new technology precisely means you're pro- and not anti-science.

Read up
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1503/1503.05944.pdf

You are posting a paper you didn't read. 4G are not milimeter waves. The paper you posted studies the penetration depth and temperature effects for waves an order of magnitude higher frequency, and suggest that temperature measurements be used instead of power density for safety standards. Peer reviewed papers like this one are exactly what we should be reading to study the consequences of EM waves.

Non-ionizing radiation means radiation that doesn't have the energy to break chemical bonds, that's why ionizing radiation is the most harmful type. "DIRECT vs NON-DIRECT" means absolutely nothing, that's not a thing. Radiation dosage in this context is measured at the receptor, not at the source. UV radiation is harmful at all dosage, because it is ionizing, it has the energy to break the bonds in our skin cells (and more). That's why it burns our skin. Luckily we are adapted to it and have mechanisms to mitigate the damage. Dosage in this case is a matter of the degree of risk, not whether or not it's harmful.

That's not to say that non-ionizing radiation can't be harmful. high energy waves can have an effect on biological processes, such as stress-sensitive processes that can be affected by EM fields. Gene expression can be stress-sensitive, so under enough stress it can malfunction and lead to cancer. Precisely because of this there are plenty of studies on EM radiation at frequencies used for telecommunication.

So to put on a tinfoil hat and say that there haven't been studies on waves using 4G frequencies is plain wrong, there are decades of studies about it. You are not questioning technology, you cherry picking what you choose to think that exists, or not. It is not up for debate that there is extensive research on this. As new technologies are introduced like 5G, there is a surge of studies so that we will then be able to tell if it's harmful or not.

"Read up" I work at a nuclear research center.

[Myesyats]

I know 4G isnt milimeter waves, this is a paper on 5G which uses them - so it is you who didnt read the paper.

Overexposure to non-ionizing radiation CAN cause health issues. Moreso with the introduction of milimeter waves.

Lol if you really work at a research center then you should see how quickly it could go out of hand without extensive protective measures. And that is assuming you trust the government above you.

If you work at a place where you come into contact with more RF waves exposure you will be affected directly.

[Unique]

On Feb. 26, Trump bragged that we only had 15 cases and that we were "going to be down close to zero soon."

On April 2, we have more than 216,000 cases and 4,800+ deaths.

Trump lied and downplayed this crisis and cost us valuable time - and lives.pic.twitter.com/MoFd8QiCs9

— Democratic Coalition (@TheDemCoalition) April 2, 2020

you dont believe that do you.

[Unique]

RADIATION comes from the sun. The electromagnetic spectrum cover 25 order of magnitude of frequency. We should really just build thick walls with no windows and live in underground caves because visible light is RADIATION and is orders of magnitude more energetic than the waves used for telecommunication. Of course that wouldnt make sense, because we know better

Being anti-science is not being anti radiation (like light) or anti-technology, is being anti the scientific method. You are choosing to ignore the studies that we have on electromagnetism to suit your agenda. Scientific studies tell us which frequencies are, and aren't, safe to use. That's why we know about radiation in the first place, and how we know the difference in ionizing (the bad one you associate with the word RADIATION) and non-ionizing (the one we use to communicate) radiation.

To say there aren't studies on 4G because "have a guess why" is absurd. Of course there are plenty of studies on it, and on electromagnetism as a whole. The results from these experiments are analyzed to determine what is and isn't safe to use. Simply choosing to discard findings is the problem.

Every single body in the universe that has energy emits radiation, from yourself to you table, or the bed you sleep on. Luckily people study these things so we know the different effects of radiation at different frequencies (energy).

Non-ionizing doesnt mean non-harmful... Low dosages and no long-term exposure are key, also DIRECT vs NON-DIRECT. Sun (UV radiation) is low dosage unless you stand around in the sun basically 24/7. If radiation is aimed directly at you, it will have effects even in low dosages given there is long-term exposure (which is guaraanted with telecommunication). So a lot depends whether it is focused on you or not.
"MmWave  cause radiation energy to focus in one or certain directions, leading  to increased heating if the main beam points to  the human  body. Thus,all possible pointing directions of the antenna arrays should be considered to ensure  safety, and perhaps a peak value should be used. Moreover, transmission with different  amplitude  and  phase  combinations  in  the adaptive array may result in the creation of constructive/destructive electrical field interference patterns inside the body"

At higher frequencies, surface layers of the skin are also increasingly affected.

It won't kill us all but any concerns are certainly warranted and being anti-science is a stupid accusation in this affair. We are definitely entering a new territory here.

Questioning new technology precisely means you're pro- and not anti-science.

Read up
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1503/1503.05944.pdf

You are posting a paper you didn't read. 4G are not milimeter waves. The paper you posted studies the penetration depth and temperature effects for waves an order of magnitude higher frequency, and suggest that temperature measurements be used instead of power density for safety standards. Peer reviewed papers like this one are exactly what we should be reading to study the consequences of EM waves.

Non-ionizing radiation means radiation that doesn't have the energy to break chemical bonds, that's why ionizing radiation is the most harmful type. "DIRECT vs NON-DIRECT" means absolutely nothing, that's not a thing. Radiation dosage in this context is measured at the receptor, not at the source. UV radiation is harmful at all dosage, because it is ionizing, it has the energy to break the bonds in our skin cells (and more). That's why it burns our skin. Luckily we are adapted to it and have mechanisms to mitigate the damage. Dosage in this case is a matter of the degree of risk, not whether or not it's harmful.

That's not to say that non-ionizing radiation can't be harmful. high energy waves can have an effect on biological processes, such as stress-sensitive processes that can be affected by EM fields. Gene expression can be stress-sensitive, so under enough stress it can malfunction and lead to cancer. Precisely because of this there are plenty of studies on EM radiation at frequencies used for telecommunication.

So to put on a tinfoil hat and say that there haven't been studies on waves using 4G frequencies is plain wrong, there are decades of studies about it. You are not questioning technology, you cherry picking what you choose to think that exists, or not. It is not up for debate that there is extensive research on this. As new technologies are introduced like 5G, there is a surge of studies so that we will then be able to tell if it's harmful or not.

"Read up" I work at a nuclear research center.

the world also thought asbestos was safe once as well.

[rincon]

Non-ionizing doesnt mean non-harmful... Low dosages and no long-term exposure are key, also DIRECT vs NON-DIRECT. Sun (UV radiation) is low dosage unless you stand around in the sun basically 24/7. If radiation is aimed directly at you, it will have effects even in low dosages given there is long-term exposure (which is guaraanted with telecommunication). So a lot depends whether it is focused on you or not.
"MmWave  cause radiation energy to focus in one or certain directions, leading  to increased heating if the main beam points to  the human  body. Thus,all possible pointing directions of the antenna arrays should be considered to ensure  safety, and perhaps a peak value should be used. Moreover, transmission with different  amplitude  and  phase  combinations  in  the adaptive array may result in the creation of constructive/destructive electrical field interference patterns inside the body"

At higher frequencies, surface layers of the skin are also increasingly affected.

It won't kill us all but any concerns are certainly warranted and being anti-science is a stupid accusation in this affair. We are definitely entering a new territory here.

Questioning new technology precisely means you're pro- and not anti-science.

Read up
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1503/1503.05944.pdf

You are posting a paper you didn't read. 4G are not milimeter waves. The paper you posted studies the penetration depth and temperature effects for waves an order of magnitude higher frequency, and suggest that temperature measurements be used instead of power density for safety standards. Peer reviewed papers like this one are exactly what we should be reading to study the consequences of EM waves.

Non-ionizing radiation means radiation that doesn't have the energy to break chemical bonds, that's why ionizing radiation is the most harmful type. "DIRECT vs NON-DIRECT" means absolutely nothing, that's not a thing. Radiation dosage in this context is measured at the receptor, not at the source. UV radiation is harmful at all dosage, because it is ionizing, it has the energy to break the bonds in our skin cells (and more). That's why it burns our skin. Luckily we are adapted to it and have mechanisms to mitigate the damage. Dosage in this case is a matter of the degree of risk, not whether or not it's harmful.

That's not to say that non-ionizing radiation can't be harmful. high energy waves can have an effect on biological processes, such as stress-sensitive processes that can be affected by EM fields. Gene expression can be stress-sensitive, so under enough stress it can malfunction and lead to cancer. Precisely because of this there are plenty of studies on EM radiation at frequencies used for telecommunication.

So to put on a tinfoil hat and say that there haven't been studies on waves using 4G frequencies is plain wrong, there are decades of studies about it.  You are not questioning technology, you cherry picking what you choose to think that exists, or not. It is not up for debate that there is extensive research on this. As new technologies are introduced like 5G, there is a surge of studies so that we will then be able to tell if it's harmful or not.

"Read up" I work at a nuclear research center.

the world also thought asbestos was safe once as well.

and you know how we know asbestos is unsafe?

Because people study these things.

So we should NOT ignore the studies about it by continuing to use asbestos. We shouldn't claim that its a government conspiracy to take asbestos away from us. We should read the studies, listen to the experts, and make conclusions based on that. We should operate to the best of our knowledge and not ignore what so many people are working on studying for the rest of us.

[Myesyats]

I am listeninig to experts. Hundreds of scientists have put forward concerns over that technology.

Its never black and white as you make it out to be.

[Pedram]

China really do owe the world an apology after this is over, they have caused untold amount of misery to people with their weird eating habits, they need to reconsider that shit, at some point they have to learn from their mistakes or they're bound to repeat it in the future.

Has Iran ever apologized for exporting terrorism that has caused misery to an untold amount of people around the world?

Why do you get so triggered whenever someone criticize China? you're not even Chinese dude.

[Warrior]

There is a town called Asbestos in my province, because they exploit a huge mine there. The life expectancy in this village is 33 years old.

[rincon]

I am listeninig to experts. Hundreds of scientists have put forward concerns over that technology.

Its never black and white as you make it out to be.

You aren't, by an enormous consensus the experts will tell you that everything we know about EM radiation near 4G is that it is not harmful. There is no government conspiracy to not do studies on it.

For higher frequencies like 5G there is a real concern because we don't know yet. It's too new, so more studies are being done, and more will need to be done, to determine it's effects with more certainty.

[Warrior]

There is a town called Asbestos in my province, because they exploit a huge mine there. The life expectancy in this village is 33 years old.

I invented this tbh

Although the village does exist, and there was a mine. Currently they consider changing the name for something less negative.

[Arquitecto]

To be honest would not be surprised if Kaz came up with a thesis on how Xiaoping or Mao was actually GOOD for China.

All you have to do to know of China is literally go there beyond the technical analysis. It is quite literally a shithole, beyond their impressive cities, the exceptions.


And Myestats your concerns are right but this is more a case of avaliability bias in which the public generally does expand the panic of a certain technology based on the cascading fear of the said entity.

5G does push boundaries of the radiation of the human body limit but there isn't conclusive studies on it to conclude that it is relatively harmful.

On paper yes but in this form that is too early to say just yet.

[Young Kaz]

China really do owe the world an apology after this is over, they have caused untold amount of misery to people with their weird eating habits, they need to reconsider that shit, at some point they have to learn from their mistakes or they're bound to repeat it in the future.

Has Iran ever apologized for exporting terrorism that has caused misery to an untold amount of people around the world?

Why do you get so triggered whenever someone criticize China? you're not even Chinese dude.

Because when the axe is swung on China my head is also chopped off. Outside of Asia we are the same thing to everybody.

[Myesyats]

Has Iran ever apologized for exporting terrorism that has caused misery to an untold amount of people around the world?

Why do you get so triggered whenever someone criticize China? you're not even Chinese dude.

Because when the axe is swung on China my head is also chopped off. Outside of Asia we are the same thing to everybody.

You project these claims as if thats what everyone does. Maybe that was true in the 80s but not anymore apart from a small but vocal minority.

Also whats wrong about not being able to tell between Chinese, Japanese and Korean?

Would you be able to tell Poles from Ukrainians and Russians or Slovaks?

[Nishankly]

Gonna hit 1 million cases tonight and its reached 50,000 deaths already.

[Unique]

PC has got so bad these days that people are now offended on behalf of other people.

[Unique]

Why do you get so triggered whenever someone criticize China? you're not even Chinese dude.

Because when the axe is swung on China my head is also chopped off. Outside of Asia we are the same thing to everybody.

You project these claims as if thats what everyone does. Maybe that was true in the 80s but not anymore apart from a small but vocal minority.

Also whats wrong about not being able to tell between Chinese, Japanese and Korean?

Would you be able to tell Poles from Ukrainians and Russians or Slovaks?

good point

[El Gunner]

continue fighting the good fight Myesmates

gotta love "scientists" for thinking they're "experts"

but when it comes to my thoughts on 5G, it's the same as i said with AI advancement in the other thread. It's inevitable, these people don't care about the ethics codes, it's simply just there to make research look more humane... i've not studied up to masters or doctorate levels, but im very well acclimated to the politics involved in University boardrooms. It all comes down to the agenda of the one with the most power/money at the end. And the AI advancement agenda is unstoppable.

[Thimmy]

How are the Swedes of this forum doing, these days? From what I’m reading, the liberal approach doesn’t seem to be working out, at all The lockdown is costing our companies 600m euros+ per week, and the government is paying heavily for it, but it really looks like it’s an investment that’s paying off in the long-term.  As much as I would like to travel across the border again, I really hope the Swedish government start taking this more seriously.

[Myesyats]

Bruh governments lie about everything, i wouldnt be surprised if most of the so-called scientists were bribed over by the tech giants etc.

[CBarca]

This thread has really devolved over the past day. Incredible

Did I really just see someone put "scientists" in quotations

I'm done

[rincon]

Every time I read that I laugh

I, and all my colleagues, would love to know where all this money is so we can get some bribes to start pushing some agendas.

[Unique]

i been thinking today should all deaths linked to corona virus go down as COD or as a contributing factor. you see storys of a man with heart failure goes into hospital catches corona virus then has a heart attack and dies and the COD says corona virus. you could say if the sick man didnt get corona virus he would still be alive and you could also say if the guy was not sick and got corona virus he would still be alive. when they do a study on this virus i think it would be good to know how many people died from corona virus and how many people had corona virus and died. most of you will say that dont matter but when it comes to studys and medical science then its very importent.

[Young Kaz]

Why do you get so triggered whenever someone criticize China? you're not even Chinese dude.

Because when the axe is swung on China my head is also chopped off. Outside of Asia we are the same thing to everybody.

You project these claims as if thats what everyone does. Maybe that was true in the 80s but not anymore apart from a small but vocal minority.

Also whats wrong about not being able to tell between Chinese, Japanese and Korean?

Would you be able to tell Poles from Ukrainians and Russians or Slovaks?

It is true. Babun tried to claim it was an American thing then got super quiet when I brought up a wikipedia article that was full of his own countrymen mistaking Japanese people with Chinese.

And its wrong when people are the victims of violence and racism. Europeans bring a net influence of crime such as drug dealing, pedophilia, and domestic assault to Asia and they are never stereotyped and singled out the way Japanese(and non chinese other Asians) have been in the west.

It doesnt matter if a Japanese person can tell a slav from a celt. Both are treated with dignity and respect in the country. Japanese fans were called Chinese, and literally kicked out of stadium in Germany. They pleaded they were not Chinese, and it didnt matter because its never mattered. If I hate Chinese people I also, by default, hate every person who looks like they could be Chinese. There is no difference.

[rincon]

That's an important point, I think it goes both ways as well. With all this chaos there is surely people that are dying from covid that will never be tested, and people dying from other stuff while having covid like you say.

[CBarca]

There are surely people that are dying who might have corona but it's really the cancer, or the heart attack or the X of something else that is killing them. For those to be corona deaths...I agree, it's iffy.

But I would guess that the vast majority of those cases with comorbidities are at least accelerated or propelled towards death by coronavirus. Is it wrong to label those deaths as due to coronavirus? I would argue not. What Rincon mentions is an important point too (w.r.t those who are dying that will never be tested).

In the end I think statistics will rule the day and the # of deaths to coronavirus will be pretty accurate to what it is truly.

[Myesyats]

Every time I read that I laugh

I, and all my colleagues, would love to know where all this money is so we can get some bribes to start pushing some agendas.

Every time media outlets write "Scientists agree that..." you think they're talking about you?

You dont bribe the pawns, you bribe the king and its enough.

[Sponsored content]