Most of our household electric devices are killing us

My ex lived her life until she was 20 under power lines and the ex in laws still live there. Hmmm...Coincidence? I THINK NOT!

I guess if my son ever does something 'not so smart', I can blame his mom's side of the family?

BTW, my son's an angel...he got that from my side of the family.

 

Does that include like TV and computers?

Cause my momma always said, that stuff is bad for you.

 

And now for the rest of the story... The rats using blow dryers were noted to have a better sex life.

 

and I just thought it was the dumb programs on the TV that were making us so stupid.

Meanwhile, what about those of us who use cell phones too much? Especially when we can feel them getting hot? It kind of worries me.

 

Before everyone accepts this one study, I think we should mention that people have been studying this for decades now, and the results, taken as a whole, are muddy and controversial to say the least.

I want to look at the actual paper. If their results are this spectacular and solid, I don't know why they didn't get it published in a more widely-read journal.

Don't get me wrong. I really believe there could be an affect. And I can say nice things about that department at UW; they have some very solid people, in my opinion. I always have my freshman students (physics) take an oscilliscope reading of their own skin to see the non-so-tiny 60 Hz signal driven by all the wiring around them.

And Nomar, yes it's TV and everything else that's plugged into a wall outlet. It's even the AC power running through your walls. Even LCD monitors are plugged in, though their fields are much smaller than those of traditional CRTs. It's everywhere, and it's all at 60 Hz (in the US).

edit: there, their, whatever. it's science after all.

 

My mom always said that putting Cacti next to TVs and Computers helped reduce the damage.

What do you say to THAT mister fancy-schmancy science teacher man.

 

Dude, Nomar, I'm not trying to give you the high hat. I really just wanted to help answer your question.

Yes, your mom's on target to an extent, I believe. The cacti should shield you a tiny bit, but I wouldn't think it would make a huge difference, unless your cacti entirely surrounded your TV, was grounded.

Overall, Americans should worry more about buckling their seat belts and getting some exercise, if you ask me. But I'm no doctor.

 

Why cactus? What's the reasoning?

 

Yeah...and...effect, affect...whatever!!!! He blinded us with science!

 

No, I truly meant to say that low-frequency fields could cause
"Feeling or emotion, especially as manifested by facial expression or body language."

Woofer, thanks for the link.

 

So....uhhhh...what are the electric devices doing to my "private" areas? I'm asking for a friend.

 

Actually, a buddy of mine is an environmental science who studies water quality.

He says drinking water from plastic bottles is doing great harm to men, in particular. He claims that research shows water from plastic bottles "adversely affecting genitalia" eek and "promoting sterility."

Anyway, I don't know the answer to your question, but I always wonder about keeping cell phones in pockets.

edit: I looked over the study. I'm no expert in this exact field, even though I'm very interested. It looks like the statistical difference in control rats and the exposed rats is significant. They only used eight rats, but the data look fine to me.

 

I do research on DNA damage myself. I just skimmed the article, but here's a few things that jumped out at me:

1. Their system seems artificial to me. I mean, they put a rat inside the freaking coil for 24-48 hours nonstop. This seems a bit like wrapping yourself in all of your appliances, then turning them on for 24-48 straight hours. Not sure about the numbers they put forth, but the fact that they had to "layer epoxy" between the loops of the coil to "minimize vibration" also leads me to believe they were putting some serious juice through there.

2. they take the rat brains instantly after treatment. They don't allow any time for the body to repair the breaks. While this does probably mean that some breaks are occurring, it also means that they don't look at what is actually dangerous- persistence of the breaks. It would be much more interesting to me to see what happens if the rats were left for 24-48 hours after treatment. I'd bet that they would be the same as the controls. The DNA damage repair pathways are pretty efficient.

3. The paper is full of errors (typos, grammar). Not to be picky about it, but any journal worth publishing in would not have allowed this to be put forth in this form. I just got a paper accepted, and my reviewers would have torn this paper apart. I'm not even sure this was peer-reviewed.

As a matter of fact, the work was supported by "The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences".. guess who publishes the journal this is in? Right. "The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences".


That said, it does seem to prove that breaks occur in response to the treatment. The problem is, this is not a novel finding, and the significance of this is unclear, since most of these breaks would probably be repaired pretty quickly.

So make sure to take vitamins with antioxidants, kids.

 

I wonder about the water thing- I have heard of studies linking byproducts produced in plastics manufacturing leading to sterility in aquatic animals (I think it was crocodiles). Is it some chemical leached out from the bottles into the water? If so, is it mainly a risk with the "disposable" bottles? (i.e. is my Nalgene bottle safe?)

About the cell phones, I think they emit much less radiation when they're not in use, but I could easily be wrong. Even if they are emitting when they're in your pocket, the worst they'd do is mess up your sperm, or maybe give you ball cancer. So no big deal, right? (note that I just took my cell phone out of my pocket and put it on the table)

 

FYI, all electronic devices shipped in the US must meet FCC standards for EMI (electromagnetic interference). My company has an entire group of EEs dedicated to testing all systems and peripherals for verifying that the respective device meets all international EMI restrictions.

 

Baqui, I hear you, and I actually agree with the standards. I think some people think we don't have enough good data for calibrating the standards. Some believe the dosage levels are just a shot in the dark at this point.

Jebus, thanks a lot! We so needed some real biology expertise (or I did anyway) compared to the physics angle.

 

'THIS field of light bulbs powered by invisible energy from overhead cables was “planted” near Bath, Somerset, to show the peril of living near pylons.'