Oddbean

Fine - let’s talk man-made non-ionizing emissions within the chromosphere. It all comes back to the amount of radiation in a given area relative to a mass. Even the “bioinitiative” group follows this. What’s being debated, then, is the amount of energy being radiated. Non-ionizing radiation cannot alter the chemical bonds in, well, anything outside of heating them up (the vibration you mentioned). The original post was surrounding Bluetooth headphones, so then let’s limit this to the 2.4ghz band of the UHF range. BT headphones give off, at most, 100mw of radiation, having a typical range of .01mw - 100mw (-20db to 20db). Typically WiFi APs start around 100mw and some can go as higher than 1000mw. Then there are typically multiple radios per AP. This is not speak of the dozens of radios surrounding in various devices surrounding most people for the last 20 years. Add up the amount of radiation anyone around any kind of data stream is receiving and its multiples of what any BT buds are giving off. Most of the time, BT buds are operating in the 1-10mw range. Now, I grant that the “bioinitiative” group calls this a “severe hazard”… but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I can hear the “proximity” argument already. That requires you to also then factor in body mass and absorption rate. Soecific absorbtion is measured in 1000’s of mw per kg. Magnitudes higher than what we are talking about. And again, let’s not forget the basic principle - absorbtion in the form of heat. As in burns. There is no other absorption for non-ionizing radiation, which is everything longer than ultraviolet. Do you feel a constant burning on your skin when you wear ear buds? How about your phone on your head? What about 10 phones? While standing near a WiFi AP, near a cell tower running at 2.1ghz? Sorry. This makes no fucking sense. Even from a first principles perspective, it doesn’t add up.