4 ms·

> HV power lines are, in an electrical sense, very far away from you I've seen family houses literally next to high tension poles (not just regular poles, I me

by vfc1 7y ago

> HV power lines are, in an electrical sense, very far away from you I've seen family houses literally next to high tension poles (not just regular poles, I mean those huge ones many times the height of the house), for example in Portugal. I don't see any definitive conclusion online for the link between high voltage lines proximity and cancer, but I am not an expert. Seems to me the consensus is far from general.

brianwawok 7y ago
In the US there is usually a discount on houses bordering those. So the market sees a small difference.
- verall 7y ago
  The market is happy to sustain homeopathy and fake Faraday cages for your microwave-based electric and gas meters. Radium used to fetch a high price for its health "benefits"...
  - brianwawok 7y ago
    I am not sure pointing to random cons for sale on the marketplace really changes the fact that if high voltage power lines are next to your house, it is worth less. If nothing else, it looks ugly.
verall 7y ago
Yea, the huge ones, many times the height of the house, are uh, really many times the height of the house above the house. According to [0], the maximum magnetic field from 275kV-400kV overhead power line (this would be measured much closer to the line than you could possibly get to without climbing the towers) is 100uT. Standing next to a running vacuum cleaner about 800uT. A standard clinical MRI is typically 1.5T, so about 10000 times the strength of the power line if you were a lineman sitting next to a live line. Typical field under the line: 3-5 uT. That's standing right under the line. The family underneath the line gets more radiation from leaving the TV on, or god forbid, the wifi or their cell phone. Consensus is not far from general. You don't have to be an expert. If you are really afraid of radiation, talking about power lines really weakens your case. They do almost nothing compared to normal household appliances we use all the time. The inverse square rule is real. I think to avoid your best bet would be joining an Amish community. And don't go outside, without covering up. The sun's radiation is like, actually proven to be harmful to skin and DNA, and is many times more powerful. Too bad getting sun is also clinically associated with many health benefits! Oh what will we do... [0] https://www.nationalgridet.com/document/82871/download https://www.nationalgridet.com/document/82871/download
- vfc1 7y ago
  Even if current levels of radiation are harmless, it does not mean that the same applies to 5G. Studies funded by the 5G industry are 10 times more likely to say there are no side effects on human, which is suspect and an indication that is an attempt to manipulate science going on - https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cell-phone-radiation-cause-cancer/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cell-phone-radiation-c... The leading independent organization on cancer causes says that current cell phones are "possible carcinogens" - https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cell-phone-brain-tumor-risk/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cell-phone-brain-tumor-risk...
  - verall 7y ago
    > Even if current levels of radiation are harmless, it does not mean that the same applies to 5G. Good thing I'm talking about overhead powerlines and not 5G then. Unless your reply was meant for someone else. Although I believe the chance that 5G is harmful is basically nil, mostly due to my EE degree and a basic understanding of "non-ionizing radiation" and "ionizing radiation", it is probably about 100X more rational than complaining about overhead powerlines. Seriously I just don't get it what problem do people have with overhead powerlines. Saying overhead powerlines cause cancer is like, on par with calling aircraft contrails "chemtrails" and saying they are part of a nefarious government plot. There are plenty of real nefarious government plots, but you hear people talking again and again about chemtrails because they don't understand aircraft engines or heat or water. Just like there are real issues in the health system, but again and again people cut off the legs of their own argument by going off about overhead powerlines. Lastly, WTF are those sources? Is nutritionfacts.org a leading independent organization on cancer causes? That is a 5-minute long video of someone doing zoom-highlights on excerpts from studies from 2011. The first comment is someone saying the WHO is bought-out by corporate interests, although, the WHO is like the main ethos argument from the video. Do you use a cell phone? How do you hide from the other people using their cell phones, or the Wi-Fi rays coming from your computer? If you have a new router, 802.11ad already communicates in the 60Ghz band, that's a pretty big number if big frequency numbers are scary.
  - klmr 7y ago
    > The leading independent organization on cancer causes says that current cell phones are "possible carcinogens" It is crucial to understand what this actually means. the IARC classifications are valid but — particularly to lay people — incredibly misleading and pretty much useless. All that “possible carcinogen” means is that we haven’t yet collected sufficient evidence to discount harm. It’s not evidence of carcinogenicity at all. If anything it’s the opposite, because it means that, despite the existence of relevant studies, there hasn’t been any consistent demonstration of carcinogenic effect. Furthermore, IARC only classifies risk itself, not hazard [1], nor dosage effects. For context, IARC classifies sunlight exposure and processed meat consumption as “definitely carcinogenic” [2]. Despite this, regular exposure to sunlight is crucial for your health, and regular meat consumption is known to have little absolute effect on cancer risk (in other words, although red meat does have an effect, the effect size is tiny). [1] https://worksmart.org.uk/health-advice/health-and-safety/hazards-and-risks/what-difference-between-hazard-and-risk https://worksmart.org.uk/health-advice/health-and-safety/haz... [2] https://monographs.iarc.fr/list-of-classifications/ https://monographs.iarc.fr/list-of-classifications/

by vfc1 7y ago

brianwawok 7y ago

In the US there is usually a discount on houses bordering those. So the market sees a small difference.

verall 7y ago
The market is happy to sustain homeopathy and fake Faraday cages for your microwave-based electric and gas meters. Radium used to fetch a high price for its health "benefits"...
- brianwawok 7y ago
  I am not sure pointing to random cons for sale on the marketplace really changes the fact that if high voltage power lines are next to your house, it is worth less. If nothing else, it looks ugly.

verall 7y ago

Yea, the huge ones, many times the height of the house, are uh, really many times the height of the house above the house. According to [0], the maximum magnetic field from 275kV-400kV overhead power line (this would be measured much closer to the line than you could possibly get to without climbing the towers) is 100uT. Standing next to a running vacuum cleaner about 800uT. A standard clinical MRI is typically 1.5T, so about 10000 times the strength of the power line if you were a lineman sitting next to a live line. Typical field under the line: 3-5 uT. That's standing right under the line. The family underneath the line gets more radiation from leaving the TV on, or god forbid, the wifi or their cell phone. Consensus is not far from general. You don't have to be an expert. If you are really afraid of radiation, talking about power lines really weakens your case. They do almost nothing compared to normal household appliances we use all the time. The inverse square rule is real. I think to avoid your best bet would be joining an Amish community. And don't go outside, without covering up. The sun's radiation is like, actually proven to be harmful to skin and DNA, and is many times more powerful. Too bad getting sun is also clinically associated with many health benefits! Oh what will we do... [0] https://www.nationalgridet.com/document/82871/download https://www.nationalgridet.com/document/82871/download

vfc1 7y ago
Even if current levels of radiation are harmless, it does not mean that the same applies to 5G. Studies funded by the 5G industry are 10 times more likely to say there are no side effects on human, which is suspect and an indication that is an attempt to manipulate science going on - https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cell-phone-radiation-cause-cancer/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cell-phone-radiation-c... The leading independent organization on cancer causes says that current cell phones are "possible carcinogens" - https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cell-phone-brain-tumor-risk/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cell-phone-brain-tumor-risk...
- verall 7y ago
  > Even if current levels of radiation are harmless, it does not mean that the same applies to 5G. Good thing I'm talking about overhead powerlines and not 5G then. Unless your reply was meant for someone else. Although I believe the chance that 5G is harmful is basically nil, mostly due to my EE degree and a basic understanding of "non-ionizing radiation" and "ionizing radiation", it is probably about 100X more rational than complaining about overhead powerlines. Seriously I just don't get it what problem do people have with overhead powerlines. Saying overhead powerlines cause cancer is like, on par with calling aircraft contrails "chemtrails" and saying they are part of a nefarious government plot. There are plenty of real nefarious government plots, but you hear people talking again and again about chemtrails because they don't understand aircraft engines or heat or water. Just like there are real issues in the health system, but again and again people cut off the legs of their own argument by going off about overhead powerlines. Lastly, WTF are those sources? Is nutritionfacts.org a leading independent organization on cancer causes? That is a 5-minute long video of someone doing zoom-highlights on excerpts from studies from 2011. The first comment is someone saying the WHO is bought-out by corporate interests, although, the WHO is like the main ethos argument from the video. Do you use a cell phone? How do you hide from the other people using their cell phones, or the Wi-Fi rays coming from your computer? If you have a new router, 802.11ad already communicates in the 60Ghz band, that's a pretty big number if big frequency numbers are scary.
- klmr 7y ago
  > The leading independent organization on cancer causes says that current cell phones are "possible carcinogens" It is crucial to understand what this actually means. the IARC classifications are valid but — particularly to lay people — incredibly misleading and pretty much useless. All that “possible carcinogen” means is that we haven’t yet collected sufficient evidence to discount harm. It’s not evidence of carcinogenicity at all. If anything it’s the opposite, because it means that, despite the existence of relevant studies, there hasn’t been any consistent demonstration of carcinogenic effect. Furthermore, IARC only classifies risk itself, not hazard [1], nor dosage effects. For context, IARC classifies sunlight exposure and processed meat consumption as “definitely carcinogenic” [2]. Despite this, regular exposure to sunlight is crucial for your health, and regular meat consumption is known to have little absolute effect on cancer risk (in other words, although red meat does have an effect, the effect size is tiny). [1] https://worksmart.org.uk/health-advice/health-and-safety/hazards-and-risks/what-difference-between-hazard-and-risk https://worksmart.org.uk/health-advice/health-and-safety/haz... [2] https://monographs.iarc.fr/list-of-classifications/ https://monographs.iarc.fr/list-of-classifications/