On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Nick May wrote:
> interesting story on the bbc about a sticker that is claimed (with some
> evidence, it appears) to modify cellphone emmissions so that they do not
> damage DNA....
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid_1574000/1574197.stm
Boy, this really smells like a complete scam.
He found that the substance reacted with the earth's magnetic fields
and neutralised radiation from soils.
"Neutralised" what sort of radiation, and in what way? Radiation doesn't
just vanish; it gets absorbed by something. Is this absorbing it? If so,
why not say so, rather than say "neutralised"? If not, it's still there,
it's the same radiation, and will have its usual effects.
As to what sort of radiation, from looking at the sticker, it seems
apparent that this blocks visible light radiation, but that's not really
such a concern, is it? Does this have anything at all to do with the
part of the electromagnetic spectrum a cellphone is using?
"The easiest way to describe it is that it neutralises any damaging
effect from electro magnetic waves from a cellphone on human DNA,"
Mr Dandurand said.
Again, "neutralising." It's either blocking certain frequencies or
it's not. What's the deal?
"That is what it does. How it works is that it allows the wave to
become more coherent or more like a laser beam and less like a
flashlight and more of a focus coming from your cellphone.
"Allows" the wave? How? What or who was stopping the wave from doing
this before? Santa Claus? And how does a single wave become "coherent"?
And why doesn't this make any sense at all to someone who's had a least
a little experience with the principles of RF?
Dr Hamilton said: "It is just a sticker, that was basically proven
through DNA studies by quantum-biological research labs in the US.
What labs? What research? Where do I see the reports? And what the heck is
"quantum-biological" research?
I could go on to take apart the DNA rubbish they go on about, but I'm
not going to waste the time.
I'm really, really disappointed that the BBC would publish something
like this apparently without doing even minimal fact checking. Just
running it by a science reporter would have been a good start. As it is,
they're just giving free advertising to quacks. In fact, I'm going to
write a letter to them to complain.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs_at_cynic.net> +81 3 5778 0123 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
[ Need archives? How to unsubscribe? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Wed Oct 3 04:40:45 2001