Re:New Scientist Article (Score 1)

Interesting. Good article. Thanks for the pointer.

I still think persons who expose themselves to even comparitively low RF are putting themselves at risk (probably low) of ... something :). What is that something though?

• Faster responses.
• Affecting/damaging cells causing cancer in a few cases.
• Greater knowledge (using RF device to talk to wise people
• Stupidity (using RF device to talk to wise people ... and not understanding)
• Escaping danger ... (using RF device to call in the rescue services after getting trapped up a tree in a remote place)
• Hot food
• ..... :)

However, more seriously, I think mobile phones have a much greater capability for damage in other areas. I'm trying to get a bit of perspective here.

If someone crashes a car while on a mobile then is it the car manufacturer's fault? The mobile makers fault? The country's fault (for giving driving licence, providing roads, ...)? Or the person's fault? Definately the latter if the person knows all risks involved in what they're doing. However we could blame any of the above or drugs, the bright sun, the cute distracting butt on the sidewalk, ..... and more. So maybe we'd just better default to holding everyone somewhat responsible for themselves.

Mobile phones probably indirectly cause more noise pollution/annoyance than anything else by bringing loud single-sided conversations out everywhere public. While not hugely life threataning in itself (except to those annoying people annoying axe-murderers) it would be probably the effect felt by most people. Would this be a better reason to be worried about mobiles? Depends I suppose.

Something else: Can anyone point us to somewhere on the web where there is information on the growth of plants near power lines or power antennae? This was interesting, plants grew noticably faster.