Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Sept 16, 2023 5:39:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Sept 16, 2023 5:56:21 GMT -8
That guy comes across as a complete wingnut. And that includes his support of RFK Jr., who redefines the meaning of a conspiracy theory crackpot. Who by-the-way profits from peddling anti-vax nonsense. Note that Blushfied produces no medical data to back up his fear mongering. Just a bunch of smoke screen mumbo jumbo that the gullible will fall for. Every once in a while, fear mongering will pop up that cell phone radiation causes an increase in brain cancer. Which there is no evidence to support, but that doesn’t stop people from periodically going into hysterics over it. During one of these times, I took a look at the rates of brain cancer. One would think with the mass adoption of cell phones, that the rates would trend up in correlation with that adoption. They don’t. EDIT - if someone asks real nice, I might be convinced to tell you what I really think on this subject
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Sept 16, 2023 7:39:12 GMT -8
I just wanted to put it out there just in case what is going on in the EU is connected to this research. The links offered here are only a few of those that are on his site. Research True or false, think what a class action law suit would look like if everyone that has suffered from a serious illness and owns a smart phone would look like. And if there was a news leak that Apple knew of the dangers and withheld information. So this story out of France should not be taken lightly.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Sept 16, 2023 8:58:50 GMT -8
Agree that some pack of lawyers could very likely make a nuisance of themselves and launch a class action. That doesn’t mean there are actual proven dangers. On the other hand, if they knew that they were in violation of a regulation, and didn’t do anything, then they are certainly more vulnerable.
There is NO WAY that what is going on in France is connected, to such junk science designed to promote some scammer’s product. My electrical engineering degree might be almost obsolete by now, but I know complete quackery when I see it.
EDIT - one more thing. For this phone to be authorized for sale in France to begin with, it MUST pass all regulatory standards, including the one they were in violation of. A possible explanation, is that a software change made it non-compliant, because a subsequent software change made it compliant again. This could point to a hole in their testing process.
The other explanation is that France changed their testing methodology and retested according to that methodology. That seems to be what happened based upon the first link. Which hardly amounts to the big deal that some are making this out to be.
But anyone who is saying that this has been a problem all along with the iPhone 12 is being sensationalist and misleading. That isn’t possible.
EDIT #2 - it is also worth noting that the precipitating event here was a failed test, meaning it was out of regulatory compliance. There was no new discovery that exposed new or previously unknown health risks, and precipitated this. So there is zero linkage to Mr. Quackery. Or anyone else who claims that cell phone radiation is harmful. That has NEVER been proven, despite all kinds of studies.
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 13, 2023 6:22:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Nov 13, 2023 6:41:36 GMT -8
“Not going away”? It was never relevant in the first place.
What does another crackpot article from this pack of wingnuts have to do with Apple? Or with all cell phones for that matter? Apple isn’t the only ones using radio waves to make cell phones work.
Plus your original speculation on this stuff being behind what happened in France was completely WRONG.
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 13, 2023 7:23:10 GMT -8
I guess that first of all, did you even read the story? The dangers of EMF's have been known for decades. The question has always been at what levels of intensity and over what period of exposure to EMF's do they become dangerous? This subject is not simply going away.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Nov 13, 2023 7:54:42 GMT -8
I guess that first of all, did you even read the story? The dangers of EMF's have been known for decades. The question has always been at what levels of intensity and over what period of exposure to EMF's do they become dangerous? This subject is not simply going away. Those questions are independent of the clowns on that article. You are trying to create an issue where none exist. This subject has been studied to death by people with actual expertise. The so-called dangers have never been shown to exist. Even with billions of people carrying around cell phones. I choose to believe the data and studies that are out there that are backed up with actual credentials. Not some scam artist trying to promote a bogus product with self-serving fear mongering.
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 13, 2023 8:26:47 GMT -8
So you didn’t read the article, no problem.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Nov 13, 2023 8:53:43 GMT -8
Yes I did. It’s a joke like all the rest.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,645
|
Post by 4aapl on Nov 13, 2023 10:20:28 GMT -8
That article was interesting, in how it was written at least. While I'm inclined to see it as a small team's marketing efforts for something that probably doesn't matter anywhere close to the amount they are making claims to, I can't be certain. I did find it interesting right off the bat to see the company was blushield, a play or misspelling of blueshield (so any mistyping or misinterpretation goes there), and then the doctor's last name was "Blue". Coincidences happen, and that seems too obvious to make up, but if I really cared to put any time into it, I'd look into that physician's group, and maybe see who owns the URL.
Just some of the process description seemed to be making a mountain out of a mole hill, describing all the time it took to coordinate things, while only talking of a 3 year timespan.
That said, I just don't know. It is good to be aware of potential issues out there, since even if they seem to be not a real issue, they could be or they could get enough people worried about it. It's a "wall of worry" item, whether it is real or not.
But this quote from Chapter 1 of "How to drive your competition crazy" seemed fitting to me:
"Make no little enemies-people with whom you differ for some petty, insignificant personal reason. Instead, I would urge you to cultivate "mighty opposites"-people with whom you disagree on big issues, with whom you will fight to the end over fundamental convictions. And that fight, I can assure you, will be good for you and your opponent." Thomas Watson, Jr., founder of IBM
Thanks both of you, for all that you help bring to this AAPL investment board. I appreciate it, even if I don't always agree with every little thing.
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 13, 2023 12:04:33 GMT -8
Like I said earlier, the FCC does not deny the dangers of high levels of EMF exposure but they claim that as long as it does not cause the cells of the organism to heat up then it is acceptable and safe. Think of what happens in your microwave. It's the Faraday cage that provides the protection. If, Blushield or anyone else, provides the proof that levels lower than what the FCC has claimed as safe are in fact dangerous then many things will change. I don't have any answers. I would like to think that the FCC standards are correct, but history is full of examples where governing bodies have been proven wrong in their assessment of what is dangerous and what is safe. I'm just throwing this out there, each can do their own assessment. I really don't care if anyone here buys Blushields products or not, but I do care about their research claims.
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 14, 2023 2:53:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Nov 14, 2023 5:38:55 GMT -8
I acknowledge that there is research going on. Which is what those links show. My comments relate to the lack of proof of cell phone causing health problems in humans. Until/if they do, attempting to paint this as some kind of threat to Apple is baseless. Further, if and when a link is found, then society needs to do a trade off of risk versus benefit. We do this all the time. Cars kill people every day. So do cigarettes. I expect a similar outcome for cell phones if a link is ever found. Society will decide that the benefit outweighs the risk, and it will be business as usual. Just like all kinds of other products that are proven deadly and dwarf an individual’s risk compared to cell phones. And one more thing on BluShield. They sell a device that is placed in the home, which they claim mitigates the risk of EMF’s. What about time away from home at work, outdoors, shopping and so on? They are fear mongering about a technology that has been shown over and over again to not cause measurable health problems in humans. The key here is that cell devices are non-ionizing. Other devices like X-ray machines are. Which are in everyday use, in spite of the risk. Cosmic rays are also ionizing. What are we going to do about those? From the second last article: From the National Cancer Institute
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 14, 2023 6:29:35 GMT -8
Wow, the bolding and especially large font really speaks volumes. Oh, and by the way, Blushield does offer personal portable devices.
What you are implying is correct that if EMF's do cause serious damage to humans it will be brushed aside and life will continue, at some point. Otherwise civilization will be thrown back into the stone ages. But the danger to Apple and every other manufacturer of products that produce EMF radiation will come from governmental controls that would surely follow. It's easy to picture Tim Cook seating in front of a Senate committee being questioned about if and when he knew about the dangers of EMF radiation emitted from his products and watching as the AAPL stock price drops each time he pleads his 5th amendment rights. At best, I can see a new governmental agency that tests and grades each companies device on the level of EMF emitted so that the consumer could make an informed decision. A new level of competition. I would like to think that Apple has given this some consideration and research to the subject. But why would they as no danger exists, right? Again, I truly hope that you are right and all of these other people are wrong, but I've found that sticking ones head in the sand isn't always the best solution.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Nov 14, 2023 7:55:28 GMT -8
Sticking one’s head in the sand?! I replied with actual relevant data, and you chose to nitpick over the use of bold font. Really? And who exactly are “all these other people”? Where exactly is their data that counteracts all kinds of studies that show no harmful health effects?
You are fear mongering backed up by zero actual evidence. And you have important facts wrong. See below for one important example.
Governments all over the world already do exactly what you say they should do. They test for EMF radiation and susceptibility. This means that ANY device that has a radio in it, MUST be tested to ensure that the power levels do not exceed regulatory limits. Limits well below ionizing thresholds. These devices are not legal for sale until they pass.
This isn’t new and has been done this way for decades. Same applies for SAR testing which relates to whether or not a device raises the temperature beyond defined limits. The government controls you think could be coming already exist.
Do you not think that after decades of mass cell phone use, that we would be seeing medical evidence of harm to humans if it actually existed?
You seem to think that it is some kind of Wild West out there re EMF levels. The entire industry is HIGHLY regulated. And you can bet all your AAPL shares that Apple is absolutely on top of this issue. There is no choice, given the regulatory burden.
The idea of Tim needing to plead the fifth isn’t happening. Apple is required to meet regulatory standards on EMF, which they do. Just like all other companies who are covered by these regulations. Apple can’t ignore the risks, given the regulatory requirements. So if some new risk shows up, all Tim or Apple need to say is that they are in compliance with regulatory rules. They can’t seriously be expected to follow rules that don’t exist.
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 14, 2023 10:44:14 GMT -8
Yes you are correct, which brings us back to the original post that I made yesterday about a clinical study that has begun. When the results are released I will post them here. As I keep saying, I truly hope that you are correct and the results from this study acknowledges that there are no harmful effects from EMF radiation.
|
|