tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7373308365534323974.post6701730609822153237..comments2023-09-05T02:06:57.549-07:00Comments on Mobile & Wireless Forum: Wi-Fi in SchoolsMobile & Wireless Forumhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07911391906128789011noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7373308365534323974.post-28146255227595525472017-11-29T08:31:56.756-08:002017-11-29T08:31:56.756-08:00And by the way, who said exposure measured as mean...And by the way, who said exposure measured as mean energy levels, as done here, is the relevant measuring stick? It certainly is not. Short strong pulses with nil in between give low means. Also, we now know that extra low frequency radiation, ELF, composed from strong pulses in the microwaves from WiFi etc, are bio-active. For ELF, other reference values should be used. Also, some of them work by resonance, e.g. by folding the collagene molecules, thereby stimulating nevrons to fire. Resonance effects are not much dependant on high power. Resonance works very well at very low powers.<br />The researchers seem not to have done their homework, or have -<br /> for some reason - used blinders.einarflydalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01735190423656688247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7373308365534323974.post-59209665341762308152017-11-29T08:07:18.745-08:002017-11-29T08:07:18.745-08:00What a ridiculous comparison exercise! To compare ...What a ridiculous comparison exercise! To compare with the ICNIRP limits set up to protect against damage from acute heating is senseless when we know that biological impacts are found at levels way below. Better compare with the EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses, DOI 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011, which adresses real observed effects and the impact of pulsed microwave radiation which was not adressed by ICNIRP. https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-3/reveh-2016-0011/reveh-2016-0011.xml?rskey=BFhF0Q&result=1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com