Re: Can anyone tell me what to do next? (cell phones and RF)

[Guest guest]

Hello Ian,

I am not an engineer type, but I did take a weekend seminar with Dr.

Carlo

(author of Cell Phones, The Invisible Danger, and founder of the Wireless

Initiative,

one of the world's leading radiofrequency experts) a few years ago. He

elucidated

the particulars about cell phone radiation. He said that it only even

became

understood about 5 years ago that although there are microwave signals that

communicate between cell phone and cell tower, the important point is that

conversations and text info and pictures are all conveyed on Information

Carrying Radio Waves (ICRW's), and that those radio waves are the harmful

frequencies. The ICRW's ride on the microwaves, so the microwaves are

the carrier agent.

If anyone has contrary or additional info about this, I would like to hear

it.

Lily

Re: Can anyone tell me what do to next?

Posted by: " Ian Kemp " ianandsue.kemp@... hyperman_42

Mon Jun 7, 2010 3:50 pm (PDT)

Thanks Mark for sharing your very interesting letter. I'd query one thing -

when you refer to " radio waves " , I believe the frequencies involved with

cellphones etc are actually microwaves (can some of the electrical experts

in the group confirm this?). It's important to distinguish, as radio waves

usually don't harm anyone, even most ES people, but microwaves certainly

affect ES people. They are both in the electromagnetic spectrum but radio

waves have much longer wavelength, lower frequency and hence carry lower

energy and do much less damage.

Very interesting resulting discussion about the " 9-10 pm " effect and adrenal

fatigue. Again, lots of ES people seem to have the latter. The other

possible explanation might be if cellphone use drops off sharply in the

evening? (I'm just guessing here).

Marc correctly reminds us that the vast majority of ES sufferers seem to

have significant chemical sensitivities as well (usually linked to a

compromised immune system). Is that also true of you Mark?

Ian

[Guest guest]

PUK replies - I have to raise a query here regarding what was stated below

- As a long standing sufferer of ES I would suggest that its more to do

with the nature of the waves that your body is exposed to, biological windows

that are accessed often in random but relentless ways, the issue of

frequency may well be important, but as far as saying Low frequency waves are

less

damaging I think this could not be farther from the truth, they are far

more penetrative and given the likely myriad of sources that they eminate

from constant and chronic exposure to these say from house wiring, household

appliances and even mobiles they are a smoking gun ! High frequency waves

are mostly used as carrier waves for the low frequency waves to ride on,

high powered HF waves tend to form into beams that can burn, cut maim and so

on ideal for weapon/medical applications and so on but their effects are far

less easy to cover up, they also pass through tissue so rapidly that they

are unlikely to stimulate the ES reaction where as LF waves particularly

when riding off HF wave will likely unpeal and de-modulate (perhaps like a

grenade going off)as they pass through human tissue triggering an immune

response in those whose immune system is alert enough - such wave forms are

applicable to mobile comunication technologies !!!!

In a message dated 11/06/2010 06:07:19 GMT Daylight Time, zzzapit@...

writes:

ES people. They are both in the electromagnetic spectrum but radio

waves have much longer wavelength, lower frequency and hence carry lower

energy and do much less damage.

[Guest guest]

About Dr Carlo and INFORMATION CARRYING RADIO WAVES,

Other researchers talk about: HARMFUL LONGITUDINAL (scalar/Teslar) WAVES coming

from cellphone towers...

Both are exactly the same thing I suppose, just another name for it?

.

>

> Hello Ian,

>

> I am not an engineer type, but I did take a weekend seminar with Dr.

> Carlo

> (author of Cell Phones, The Invisible Danger, and founder of the Wireless

> Initiative,

> one of the world's leading radiofrequency experts) a few years ago. He

> elucidated

> the particulars about cell phone radiation. He said that it only even

> became

> understood about 5 years ago that although there are microwave signals that

> communicate between cell phone and cell tower, the important point is that

> conversations and text info and pictures are all conveyed on Information

> Carrying Radio Waves (ICRW's), and that those radio waves are the harmful

> frequencies. The ICRW's ride on the microwaves, so the microwaves are

> the carrier agent.

>

> If anyone has contrary or additional info about this, I would like to hear

> it.

>

> Lily

>

>

>

>

> Re: Can anyone tell me what do to next?

> Posted by: " Ian Kemp " ianandsue.kemp@... hyperman_42

> Mon Jun 7, 2010 3:50 pm (PDT)

>

>

> Thanks Mark for sharing your very interesting letter. I'd query one thing -

> when you refer to " radio waves " , I believe the frequencies involved with

> cellphones etc are actually microwaves (can some of the electrical experts

> in the group confirm this?). It's important to distinguish, as radio waves

> usually don't harm anyone, even most ES people, but microwaves certainly

> affect ES people. They are both in the electromagnetic spectrum but radio

> waves have much longer wavelength, lower frequency and hence carry lower

> energy and do much less damage.

>

> Very interesting resulting discussion about the " 9-10 pm " effect and adrenal

> fatigue. Again, lots of ES people seem to have the latter. The other

> possible explanation might be if cellphone use drops off sharply in the

> evening? (I'm just guessing here).

>

> Marc correctly reminds us that the vast majority of ES sufferers seem to

> have significant chemical sensitivities as well (usually linked to a

> compromised immune system). Is that also true of you Mark?

>

> Ian

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I noticed this a few years ago. " Radio waves " now seem to be the term for any

wavelength used to transmit communications, regardless of the wavelength. I find

it maddening, because it makes people think it is more innocuous. Microwaves,

infrared, they can transmit via any length.

Look at calling the high end of microwaves terahertz now. On older charts of the

emf spectrum, it is still microwaves, just given another name now, and all a

form of radio waves. :|

~ Snoshoe

>

> About Dr Carlo and INFORMATION CARRYING RADIO WAVES,

>

> Other researchers talk about: HARMFUL LONGITUDINAL (scalar/Teslar) WAVES

coming from cellphone towers...

>

> Both are exactly the same thing I suppose, just another name for it?

>

> .

>

>

>

> >

> > Thanks Mark for sharing your very interesting letter. I'd query one thing -

> > when you refer to " radio waves " , I believe the frequencies involved with

> > cellphones etc are actually microwaves (can some of the electrical experts

> > in the group confirm this?). It's important to distinguish, as radio waves

> > usually don't harm anyone, even most ES people, but microwaves certainly

> > affect ES people. They are both in the electromagnetic spectrum but radio

> > waves have much longer wavelength, lower frequency and hence carry lower

> > energy and do much less damage.

> >

[Guest guest]

You've got a carrier frequency and modulation on it that carries the

information.

There's some evidence that without the modulation, it would not cause as

many effects.

It makes sense if there is a rectifier. Then you'd be exposed to the

modulation frequencies as well as the carrier.

Becker's book Body Electric says bones are rectifiers, and I believe it...

though I don't know the frequency response. There are probably other

rectifiers in the body, and the question is, can they rectify at gigaHertz

frequencies.

With bones you can also get piezoelectric waves. One assumes then that

there would be resonant frequencies... I don't know in what range, but

different people would be sensitive to different ones. But with broadband,

every frequency over a wide range is used.

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Latifah T <zzzapit@...> wrote:

>

>

> Hello Ian,

>

> I am not an engineer type, but I did take a weekend seminar with Dr.

> Carlo

> (author of Cell Phones, The Invisible Danger, and founder of the Wireless

> Initiative,

> one of the world's leading radiofrequency experts) a few years ago. He

> elucidated

> the particulars about cell phone radiation. He said that it only even

> became

> understood about 5 years ago that although there are microwave signals that

> communicate between cell phone and cell tower, the important point is that

> conversations and text info and pictures are all conveyed on Information

> Carrying Radio Waves (ICRW's), and that those radio waves are the harmful

> frequencies. The ICRW's ride on the microwaves, so the microwaves are

> the carrier agent.

>

> If anyone has contrary or additional info about this, I would like to hear

> it.

>

> Lily

>

> Re: Can anyone tell me what do to next?

> Posted by: " Ian Kemp "

ianandsue.kemp@...<ianandsue.kemp%40ukgateway.net>hyperman_42

> Mon Jun 7, 2010 3:50 pm (PDT)

>

> Thanks Mark for sharing your very interesting letter. I'd query one thing -

> when you refer to " radio waves " , I believe the frequencies involved with

> cellphones etc are actually microwaves (can some of the electrical experts

> in the group confirm this?). It's important to distinguish, as radio waves

> usually don't harm anyone, even most ES people, but microwaves certainly

> affect ES people. They are both in the electromagnetic spectrum but radio

> waves have much longer wavelength, lower frequency and hence carry lower

> energy and do much less damage.

>

> Very interesting resulting discussion about the " 9-10 pm " effect and

> adrenal

> fatigue. Again, lots of ES people seem to have the latter. The other

> possible explanation might be if cellphone use drops off sharply in the

> evening? (I'm just guessing here).

>

> Marc correctly reminds us that the vast majority of ES sufferers seem to

> have significant chemical sensitivities as well (usually linked to a

> compromised immune system). Is that also true of you Mark?

>

> Ian

>

>