Non-f.ood Things
Need a cooker? Use your cell phone
By Sue Mueller
Jun 14, 2006, 22:06

Editor's note: The article was published just for fun. We do not intend to prove or disprove anything here.

We have received some comment on the article saying that mobile phone is safe because the radiofrequnecy used for mobile phones is different from that of ionizing radiation such as x-ray, which is a known cancer-causing agent. However, just because it is not an ionizing radiation does not necessarily mean it safe.

Regardless, we believe that there is no scientific evidence to prove that use of mobile phone is safe. The FDA says, "The available scientific evidence does not show that any health problems are associated with using wireless phones. There is no proof, however, that wireless phones are absolutely safe."

As always, when something is in doubt, try to err on the safe side.



Many organizations including the cell phone industry often downplay the risk of cell phone radiation to the brain. Results from short-term studies were used to convince consumers that use of a cell phone is not associated with brain tumors or cancer, which only develop decades after exposure.

To be fair, no one knows exactly how much harm a cell phone can do to a person. However, one thing for sure is that the radiation from a cell phone is harmful. It is only a matter of how much. There is no denying that.

Recently, new media has reported a study showing the radiation from cell phones is so full of energy they can be used to cook eggs.

In the experiment, researchers placed one egg in a porcelain cup (because it is easy to conduct heat), and put one cell phone on one side and another cell phone on the other. The researchers then called from one cell phone to another and kept the cell phones on after connecting.

During the first 15 minutes, nothing changed. After 25 minutes, however, the egg shell started to become hot and at 40 minutes, the surface of the egg became hard and bristled. Researchers found the protein in the egg had become solid although the egg yolk was still in liquid form. After 65 minutes, the whole egg was well cooked.

The study shows how scary cell phone radiation is. People should try to avoid use of cell phones. Although so far no one has proved the radiation from cell phones can cause something clinically significant. By the same token, there has been no one who can disprove the existence of such a risk.

Children should be forbidden from cell phone use because they still grow their brains and are particularly vulnerable to radiation.

Readers' comment


***Received on Mon Jul 03 01:47:14 PDT 2006

I refer to your article:

Need a cooker? Use your cell phone
By Sue Mueller
Jun 14, 2006, 22:06

There are slow cookers in the market place whereby you can switch it on before going to work and by the time you return, it will finally be ready. The identical principle is that for a relatively short period of time such as that a young child may use a cell phone for, the energy absorbed would be too low to do any cooking as with a slow cooker. It needs to be long term exposure for any affects to become noticeable. To place the energy released in perspective, consider what a cell phone emits compared to a home microwave which also uses radio waves to cook.

Home microwaves typically ranges from about 750 watts to 1500 watts. A cell phone emits only 2 watts of which half would go out the one side of the phone and the other half towards the head i.e. only 1 watt. Furthermore, as one distances the phone from the head with hands free earphones and microphone, this energy strength falls off incredibly fast. The math is that it decreases with the inverse square of the distance. So at say 2 cm (less than 1”), the energy will be a quarter of what it is if directly against the head (1/22 = ¼). At 3 cm it is already only 1/9 in strength and at say a foot (30cm) it has fallen to 1/900th the strength. All the new kiddies’ cell phones coming out include hands free head phones set and if used, there is no radiation of significance for a child reaching the brain.

Note that microwaves are set to the frequency that excites water molecules and therefore has maximum affect whereas cell phones are at much higher frequencies that then have less heating affect per watt of energy beamed at organic matter that contains water. I have also not heard of anyone cooking their hands or developing tumours from holding cell phones.

The article states "Children should be forbidden from cell phone use--" which is reckless in the light of the above. Kids (and adults) do not hold cell phones on both ears like the egg test for 40 minutes at a time. Considering the inevitability of kiddies cell phones with more than half a dozen already in the market, the writer should have been more practical in addressing this trend. Mueller should have stated that parents can minimize any concerns about the unknown affect to long term exposure to radio waves by reinforcing earphone / microphone use rather than holding the phone directly against the head, then only making short calls. But then parents often make long cell phone calls themselves and generally do not swap the phone around to the other ear periodically with these calls often right next to a child!


Ronnie Sarkin


Tel: +27(0)11-442-4242
Fax: +27(0)11-880-0857
Cell:+27(0)82-414-0114
Web: www.intelleca.co.za
Email rons@intelleca.co.za



***Received on Fri Jun 30 16:01:27 PDT 2006

re:
http://www.foodconsumer.org/777/8/ Need_a_cooker_Use_your_cell_phone.shtml

Your article on the negative effects of cell phones on humans is horribly unscientific and gives a bad taste for the actual facts behind the information on the rest of your site.

Not only does the article try to spread fear about a well known and researched reaction, it also doesn't provide any real facts. In fact, it spends the entire time implying that cell phones cause cancer without actually making that statement.

I believe you should add an amandment to the article with the actual facts about the issue.

Please see: http://www.specificimpulse.net/2006/06/ cell_phone_pseudoscience.html#more For more details.

Facts can be checked at your local University or wikipedia if you prefer the net.

--
Mike Nugent
Programmer/Author/Unix Expert
mike@illuminatus.org
"I believe the use of noise to make music will increase
until we reach a music produced through the aid of
electrical instruments which will make available for
musical purposes any and all sounds that can be heard."
-- composer John Cage, 1937


--
Need a cooker? Use your cell phone
http://www.foodconsumer.org/777/8/Need_a_cooker_Use_your_cell_phone.shtml
By Sue Mueller, Jun 14, 2006, 22:06

Dear sir,

Below I quote from the article by Ms Mueller:

" Recently, new media has reported a study showing the radiation from cell phones is so full of energy they can be used to cook eggs.

In the experiment, researchers placed one egg in a porcelain cup (because it is easy to conduct heat), and put one cell phone on one side and another cell phone on the other. The researchers then called from one cell phone to another and kept the cell phones on after connecting."

I am the author of the original article concerning the use of two mobile phones to cook an egg - I wrote it in 2000, see http://www.wymsey.co.uk/wymchron/cooking.htm taking good care to place the article within the context of other articles at Wymsey. naturally it is a complete spoof.

The Russian journalists took up the theme after my article was featured in a number of on line and print journals. They too have acknowledged that they were spoofing.

I have no more idea than you or Ms Mueller whether brains are damaged by radiation from mobile phones. I do, however, think that there is some relationship between their usage and their users' behaviour but I don't think that is down to physics!

Finally, I really think it would be a good idea to point that the egg cooking is merely a joke or remove the it entirely as it does not sit too well on a site that wants to be taken seriously.


Regards,

Charles Ivermee

--
www.wymsey.co.uk

© 2004-2005 by foodconsumer.org unless otherwise specified.