Is your wireless device Killing You?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KN6SD, Feb 8, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: K5AB-Elect-1
  1. KI4AX

    KI4AX Ham Member QRZ Page

    Death rate for smokers and cell phone users are the same as for non-smokers and people who do not use cell phones - 100%.

    KQ9J likes this.
  2. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Fortunately the people who understand triboelectric charging of liquids, electrostatic discharge, and ignition of flammable materials quickly educated the people involved, and now the appropriate warnings are posted.
  3. K9STH

    K9STH Platinum Subscriber Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page


    I did NOT call you a liar! I said that I never heard of this happening. Also, you have changed your story to say that you do not know if the FCC ordered the amateur radio operator to stay off the air or just "suggested" that he do so. Big difference!

    The affected operator may have just taken the path of least resistance and stayed off the air until he could move. Unfortunately, that is often the path that is taken because it just isn't worth the headaches to keep battling the neighbor.

    Again, I never heard of the event. I can certainly believe that there was a complaint and that the FCC did investigate the situation. But, I do find it very hard to believe that, if the amateur radio operator was in full compliance with the regulations, the FCC would order him not to transmit. However, I can believe that the FCC might suggest that he not operate especially if the amateur radio operator was considering moving.

    It has been decades since pacemakers have even been slightly susceptible to r.f. radiation and, even with the older versions, one had to be within a very few feet of a relatively high powered source. Pacemakers are subjected to very high levels of r.f. before the designs are put in production to make sure that there are no adverse reactions from the devices. There is only 1-specific thing that affects pacemakers that is of any concern these days and that is magnetic forces. Persons with pacemakers are advised to stay clear of arc welders and metal detectors (like at airports). Also, if a person, with a pacemaker, is going to have an MRI, then special precautions have to be taken.

    I should know because I have had a pacemaker for over 7-years. After it was installed, I contacted the manufacturer and had a long discussion with the engineering team that designed the unit. I was informed that I had absolutely nothing to worry about using my equipment. Although my main amplifier won't make 1500-watts output, it will do 1400-watts output and I have no problems operating from 160-meters through 70 cm. Right now, I don't have anything that goes above 450 MHz.

    Again, I did NOT call you a liar! However, I also had never heard of someone being in full compliance with the regulations being ORDERED off the air!

    Glen, K9STH
  4. K4PIH

    K4PIH Ham Member QRZ Page

    I did know a gentleman who's pacemakers were affected by his arc welder RF. RIP.
  5. K9STH

    K9STH Platinum Subscriber Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page


    It was not the r.f. from the arc welder but the magnetic flux produced by the apparatus that affected the pacemaker. People with pacemakers are definitely cautioned to stay away from operating arc welders. I mentioned that in reply #63.

    Pacemakers and high magnetic flux definitely do not "mix" well!

    Glen, K9STH
  6. WA9SVD

    WA9SVD Ham Member QRZ Page

    It's a lost cause. Those that "ask" if RF exposure causes problems, disease, etc. already have their minds made up. It's like asking in court "Are you still beating your wife?" NO logical answer; if YES, you are still beating your wife. If NO, it means you stopped beating your wife. NO way to answer that you never beat your wife in the first place.
  7. KT1F

    KT1F Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's an unreasonable sweeping statement.

    It's a perfectly reasonable question for someone to ask or wonder about.
    N0TZU likes this.
  8. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    We absolutely do know that RF fields can cause thermal heating of live tissue which is known to be damaging. That’s the basis for current exposure limits. The question is whether there are more subtle damaging effects at levels below those which cause heating. Certainly a valid topic for investigation.
  9. WB5WPA

    WB5WPA Ham Member QRZ Page

    re: "We absolutely do know that RF fields can cause thermal heating of live tissue"

    Sitting in the warming rays of the rising morning sun on a cold morning - a hazard?

    Sitting next to a warm campfire, warming one's hands and body - a hazard?

    15 um wavelength long wave IR, can that be classified as EM energy?
  10. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Reductio ad absurdum.

    RF in the context of this discussion means radio waves, which by the common definition doesn’t include light, even IR light, being EM radiation too high in frequency to be considered radio waves.

    And yes even light can be harmful, if you get too close to that campfire, or stay out in the sun too long. I’ve had second degree burns from both...

Share This Page