|Re: Don't Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile|
|Fred Atkinson (firstname.lastname@example.org)|
Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:56:16 -0500
>> Nor was mine. I didn't imply any conclusion. But, who's to say what|
>> is impossible in this case? I'm simply saying that based upon what I
>> have read, I believe there is some sort of a problem here. As I
>> stated, the jury is still out on just how big of a problem this is.
> NO, IT ISN'T. The jury is absolutely back in, and it is NOT a problem.
The jury won't be back in for years to come.
>> What reliable research has been done to determine whether or not
> Wrong. It is CATEGORICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for radiation from a cellphone
Impossible? They said it was impossible for man to fly, didn't they?
>> When I hear a cell phone salesperson say there's no danger, he has no
> No, in fact there is a substantial basis for saying that, because there
I can't say you're wrong but I can't say you're right, either.
>> So when you hear telecommunications people saying there's nothing
> That's only true if the person speaking has a financial interest. I
And one person's opinion makes it so?
> The only effect that microwaves (the wavelength used by cellphones)
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe five to ten years from now we'll have enough
> I am also always amazed by people who are concerned about cellphones
> The radiation from a cellphone CANNOT cause cancer. It's not extremely
Let's discuss this again in five to ten years. If the statistical
By the way, Linc. I don't mean this to be anything personal here. I
|Post Followup Article||Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply|
|Go to Next message: Tony P.: "Re: Radar Detectors"|
|Go to Previous message: Solario: "Re: Phone Number? (200) 222 0000"|
|May be in reply to: Marcus Didius Falco: "Don't Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile"|
|Next in thread: Linc Madison: "Re: Don't Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile"|
|TELECOM Digest: Home Page|