My elementary school teacher told us once that Americans only poop once a week. The climate is colder in North America, so their intestines pack the poop together very densely such that they only need to poop once a week. She said you’d be sent to the doctor if you poop daily in America.
Is this true?
I’d be interested in more scientific tests on this as I think some people do have a sensitivity to it.(not me personally) but I think It should be researched more about the effects of the signals on the human body if they can feel it. I wouldn’t dismiss it as silly as way back when Bluetooth had levels developed after it could produce tumours and they had to reduce the signal a lot for current day use.
Used to be able to have Bluetooth that could work past two blocks. Turns out that was NOT good for the body.
Class 1 Bluetooth devices can reach around 100 meters under ideal unobstructed line-of-sight.
There’s no scientific study to suggest Bluetooth radio frequencies are harmful. They’re very low power and it’s non-ionizing radiation.
Smoking(Polonium and lead, and thousands of carcinogens), UV exposure(sun), radon exposure(usually in homes), and air pollution are all significantly more dangerous than radio frequencies.
Radio frequencies can absolutely microwave (heat) you under specific circumstances. Like at AM/FM and DTV antenna power levels, sure, but only if you’re climbing one of the towers, then sure they can cook you inside-out(with many megawatts of RF energy)… But by the time it gets to even 1 km the power is so low it’s harmless(about a million times weaker than just one meter away, so 1 km away a 1 megawatt antenna would have only 1 watt of energy). Bluetooth class 1 devices top out at 100 milliwatts and consumer-grade WiFi tops out at 1 watt. It would kind of like being afraid of a full moon giving you a sunburn… It’s just not going to happen.
Which scientific white papers did you read on this? Can you please source them?
I’m not sure what you’re asking for… Bluetooth is extremely low power. An order of magnitude from consumer WiFi. Which itself is far less than cellular signals, which are far weaker than broadcast (radio and TV.)
https://scholar.google.com/
Wrong url?
It’s a search engine for scientific literature.
Yes, someone asked for your references and you didn’t link them. Hence I thought you copied the wrong url, giving you the benefit of the doubt.
If you intentionally linked to a search engine… that isn’t a great look
The reference is my formal education in the subject matter. I’m honestly quite certain this person needs an education more than a paper that without such an education they’d fail to comprehend.
We can’t all be PhD Electrical Engineers with a focus on wave guides. Just friendly feedback the “Educate yourself” response in a forum puts people off, even the readers who you are not directly addressing.
They just trolling
I’m asking you for the source for your information up there. I was legitimately curious and believed you to be inviting yourself to this discussion in the interest to discuss honestly but I see now from the link provided now you’re just a 15 day old account trolling bad actor being unfairly confrontational here with misinformation you probably just gained out of some AI slop. I didn’t sign on for this and I don’t know what I did to set you off. Nor do I believe you’d give a fair reason for behaving this way. (I’m sure it’s just laziness anyways)
Either way I chose not to give it more of my precious time or energy so enjoy the block.
For the benefit of any other posters who are legitimately curious as I am: I really do hope they do look into studying this further.(for real)
I’m set off? 😂
It’s very difficult to prove a negative. There’s tons of papers out there with weak evidence and poor methodologies and very low citations claiming various non-ionizing EM are bad. The problem is the lack of reproducibility. You can look up meta-analysis on this, if you like.