5 ms·
As someone now in Hong Kong about to fly back home to SF, I have always tried to schedule my flights so that I minimize my exposure to day time radiation. I gue
by slacka 13y ago
As someone now in Hong Kong about to fly back home to SF, I have always tried to schedule my flights so that I minimize my exposure to day time radiation. I guess I'm in the minority, but it's something to consider when taking international flights.
- a8da6b0c91d 13y agoSome claim that wifi and cell phone emissions bouncing around in the cabin are also cause for concern. I've no idea if it's true, but I can imagine that inside an aluminum tube 150 wifi cards trying to connect might have some biological effect.
- hbar 13y agoYou should understand the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
- a8da6b0c91d 13y agoRadio and microwaves can still have biological effects, including cancer risk. Animal experiments prove this.
- rdl 13y agoAbsolutely -- you can get RF burns from holding antennas, and you can obviously see the results of massive radars (e.g. putting a gerbil in a microwave). What we're arguing about is the signal strength and duration (and to some extent, where on the person the radiation is administered; hands are pretty tolerant compared to brain or torso), and the conversion factor to biological effect (which varies by frequency). With modern radios, you've also got duty cycle -- your cellphone isn't transmitting full-time. I'm basically not afraid at all about "tower" signals as a member of the public. I wouldn't stand in a microwave point to point beam. I also wouldn't want a 5W HT radio next to my head (or groin) for high duty cycle use, but I'm ok with holding it in my hand with a hands-free kit. The people who vote you down for saying some types of non-ionizing radiation can be bad are actually worse scientists than if you were to say all (non-ionizing or ionizing) radiation is a huge problem. We have positive evidence that some radiation is really bad, and some is sort of bad; we have a bunch of negative confirmations that low levels of many kinds of radiation aren't likely to be very bad, and certainly aren't super-bad, but the exact borderline isn't known, and varies, and a 0.01% increase in cancer with zero benefit is more of a concern to me than a 1% increase in cancer with massive benefit (e.g. a CT for trauma where you'd otherwise be likely to die). (Incidentally, my fear of ~200 wifi devices transmitting in the milliwatts on 2.4GHz or 5.8GHz or on a flight is approximately zero -- especially since it's unclear how many would actually be using the service at any given time, and it's a pretty large volume.)
- alexvr 13y agoSo I need to power off my iPhone before I put it in my pocket?
- MichaelMoser123 13y agoI don't know why this was down voted; while in an elevator one is not supposed to use a cell phone, because of this effect. At least in the elevator at work there is a sign that says so. http://microwavenews.com/news-center/using-cell-phone-elevator http://microwavenews.com/news-center/using-cell-phone-elevat...
- hueving 13y agoIt was down-voted because it's nonsensical. Nobody is making cell-phone calls on an airplane.
- ckoepp 13y agoWell, some airlines [1] already offering such services... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_on_aircraft#Status_of_specific_regions_and_individual_airlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_on_aircraft#Statu...
- philwelch 13y agoI thought one is not supposed to use a cell phone in the elevator because it doesn't work because elevators are made out of ferrous metals and hence are effectively Faraday cages.
- DanBC 13y agoI can make and receive phone calls in lifts. It was weird the first few times. I'm in the UK if that makes any difference.
- socillion 13y ago"Some claim" a lot of things. http://i.imgur.com/7LzpYl4.jpg http://i.imgur.com/7LzpYl4.jpg
- einhverfr 13y agoInterestingly flying transpacific west-ward at night is far better in terms of sleep as much as radiation.
- DanBC 13y agoHow do you travel to the airport, and did you factor in the risks of traveling at that different time? Reducing a tiny risk in exchange for increasing an already large risk feels sub-optimal to me.
- sliverstorm 13y agoStatistically traveling at night is risky (due to drunks), but I prefer interstate travel at night. The road is empty.
- Gravityloss 13y agoBut the cosmic radiation does not come from the sun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray Then, in 1912, Victor Hess carried three enhanced-accuracy Wulf electrometers[12] to an altitude of 5300 meters in a free balloon flight. He found the ionization rate increased approximately fourfold over the rate at ground level.[12] Hess also ruled out the Sun as the radiation's source by making a balloon ascent during a near-total eclipse. With the moon blocking much of the Sun's visible radiation, Hess still measured rising radiation at rising altitudes.[12] He concluded "The results of my observation are best explained by the assumption that a radiation of very great penetrating power enters our atmosphere from above." In 1913–1914, Werner Kolhörster confirmed Victor Hess' earlier results by measuring the increased ionization rate at an altitude of 9 km.