Best Regards,
- Graham

@ JQH (post 13): We will soon be posting full details of how we performed screening measurement on the Powerwatch website.

@ Frank (post 16): We know Grahame Blackwell personally, and I think it is fairly likely that he will answer any questions you have directly, instead of just criticising his lack of open evidence on here which he probably will not see. He may not, but it is certainly worth a try.

@ Hector (post 28): The piece of equipment used for measuring wasn’t an Acousti-com, but a spectrum analyser from Anritsu (MS2721A – retails at about 10,000 pounds) which gives exceptional data recording and logging facilities. Again, this wil be part of the write up of the screening measurements.

@ Hector (post 47): As mentioned above, it wasn’t a hand-held meter we used, but a considerably more sophisticated piece of measuring equipment.

@ Robert (post 120): The acousti-com is not a standard retail AM radio receiver, (though I guess it is retail of some description as EMFields sell it), but works by converting incoming pulsed signals across a set Microwave frequency band into an analogue audio output. It was designed by Powerwatch.

We will happily answer any technical or scientific questions regarding any of this subject or related ones for those still watching the thread.

Best Regards,
- Graham
Powerwatch

microwave ovens have a transformer in them i believe…. so it could be the pesky magnetic fields from that……

What you have is a device that is designed to produce a form of moderatly penetrating EM emmission which induces a thermal effect in objects placed within the effective area (ie inside the thing)

To totally shield the devise to prevent all leakage would entail much thicker shielding all round and probably some kind of double door affair as well and probable reinforcing your worktop to take the weight.

We had a microwave oven back in about 1980-2 i think it was and we were warned, when purchasing it, that there was a small amout of leakage and simply to not be in very close proximity while it was working…. so if you don’t go pressing your eyeballs to the glass you should be just fine!

The emmission that escapes the shielding is very low and when combined with the inverse square rule means you would probably have to be continually leaning on the glass while it was running for extended periods on multiple occasions to do more than discomfort the occasional skin cell… which are dead anyway!

“Re: Disgusting Ben Goldacre

Oh dear, this is turning nasty,

several times it has been suggested by your Joseph Harker I should write a letter, so lets have you print it.

Rattled old Ben Goldacre down in the gutter again, such a high-falutin scientist when he can make the facts fit, and down in the gutter when it pleases him if they won’t.

And paid to have his high and mighty pedestal, to swing left and right, by you.

So he offends hundreds with insults and innuendo, then, when his nose is pushed in the evidence and he wobbles, acknowledging risks “the mobile phone network being a danger to health – which could well turn out to be the case”, but hey retrieve it, with a mass smear none of us can know to be true. Like a squid retreating in a cloud of stinky gas to cover his passage.

We do know he had many genuine accounts of electro-sensitive illness sent in. What about Brian Stein then Ben? Explain away his lucid detailed account of how he runs a 500 million pound a year company, with an electricity-free office, because of what heavy mobile use did, and does, to his health. Oh no. Pick one wishing you get cancer, an emotional response to insult, far more ’scientific’. Now I am into sarcasm, that is what it does to you, dealing with those down in the intellectual gutter.

Off he goes disdainfully holding his nose in the air, he disgusts many of us with his chicanery deceit and double standards. No wonder some blow their tops..and you pay him, ugh.

Yours sincerely

Rod Read”

These days, you switch one of those on and you can pick up some very peculiar noises, particularly from the Eurovision Song Contest.

… a small unpublished Spanish study, examining changes in brain activity after a child uses a mobile phone. … The subjects were an 11-year-old boy and a 13-year-old girl. Using a CATEEN scanner, linked to a machine measuring brain wave activity, researchers were able to make photographic images of the changes in brain electrical activity. … “We were able to see in minute detail what was going on in the brain. …”

I don’t know what a CATEEN scanner is, though I assume it’s some sort of CAT scanner. What sort of fields does that expose the subjects to? I guess a great deal stronger than the fields from a mobile phone. And what sort of safety evaluation has been done on CATEEN scanners, particularly when used on children? How does that evaluation compare with the sort of concerns which have been raised, on grounds of varying degrees of plausibility, to mobile phones?

I think there’s a case for being more concerned about the two subjects of that study than about mobile phone users generally, or even children in particular.

it’s a con – leave it alone!