danielst

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   Yes, I am also really appreciating this forum (which I just discovered) where people can have truly thoughtful and intelligent exchanges.
2. 2.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   Thank you itcrowd for your thoughtful reply and for going deeper into this. I think you have spelled out our common ground in points 1-3 very well. And thank you also for digging up these other articles. I had a look at [5]. So our differen
3. 3.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   Thank you itcrowd for your comments and your sincere and balanced approach, which I respect even though I do not at present share your viewpoint. Thank you also for looking into the Lancet and Guardian articles. Regarding the respectability
4. 4.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   Thank you itcrowd, I am quite interested to see these studies on 5G that I did not know existed until now. I just had a look at [4]; the authors are Davide Colombi "Since 2009, he has been with Ericsson Research, Stockholm, Sweden, wh
5. 5.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   Thanks for the link to the article. It is worth quoting from it, I think: "At the Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association, an independent scientific organisation, volunteering scientists have constructed the world's
6. 6.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   You write: "Radio simply cannot give you cancer. It's been proven. We understand the physics. It's been tested to death." I am not sure how to reconcile this with the two meta analyses of studies I mention in another pos
7. 7.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   The difficulty is that with 5G, there is no option to stay away or pick the safer choice (save moving to some remote area), as the 5G base stations will transmit to everyone indiscriminately with no possibility of opting out.
8. 8.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   Very interesting, so there are a few studies! Thank you for pointing this out, I had been under the impression that there were none whatsoever. I am not sure what conclusions can be drawn from these few studies at present (I found four or f
9. 9.▲
   by danielst 7y ago

   I am not sure it is necessary to prove a negative, as you spoke of in a previous post. New drugs are subject to very rigorous testing before being released onto the market. While such drugs, when approved, are not proven definitively and wi
10. 10.▲
    by danielst 7y ago

    Thank you gruez for your answer. >Firstly, 5G has never been tested with regard to its possible health effects. Well, duh. It's not even deployed except in a few handful of countries. Should we have waited half a decade or so before
11. 11.▲
    by danielst 7y ago

    Regarding: "It would be nice if the Times article devoted more ink to studies showing 5G to be safe, instead of 95% focusing on how the claims that it is dangerous are shaky, and barely mentioning studies proving its safety." Ther
12. 12.▲
    by danielst 7y ago

    This three-part article is written by an electrical engineer who approaches the subject without any preconceptions or previous bias one way or another (make sure to read all 3 parts): https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs&#x
13. 13.▲
    by danielst 7y ago

    Regarding your comment "Yeah, "we" do; folks much brighter than I have spent a really long time studying this stuff and their findings are available for consumption by anyone interested to learn more." Firstly, 5G has ne