AirPods/Bluetooth and EMF/radiation effects

>>8810456
waste of money
dont bother

>>8810460

That's not what I'm asking.

Regardless, most other wireless ones have shitty, uncomfortable fitting tips that put awkward air pressure on your ear drums.

>>8810467
Consumer electronics produce no ionising radiation at all. Visible light has higher energy per photon than what these things put out.
People hear "radiation" and lose their shit, but these wavelengths (i.e. radio and microwaves) are harmless at reasonable irradiance

>>8810456
we have shown ionizing radiation from low dose medical imaging to be of no concern, and you think some radiowaves are going to hurt you?

>>8810523

Well these would be right next to your brain for like 8+ hours every day.

File: 1491021361237.jpg (167KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 720x960px

>>8810532
which would make you drown faster:

pouring a bucket of water over your head all at once(CT scan)

or pouring a bucket of water over your head over the span of one year(your airpods, presuming they give off 2 mSv ionizing radiation, which they don't)

This is what you're asking, but not even in the context of ionizing radiation, but waves that are going through your brain right now anyway.

i wish idiots didn't exist; such a waste of time you annoying faggots are

>>8810532

You're a massive tard.

You're getting more radiation in your brain when you go outside now fuck off.

>>8810532
Duration of exposure is irrelevant. You're exposed to higher-energy visible light and UV basically all day,
The radio waves aren't even absorbed by your brain (or any part of your body for that matter). What passes right through you cannot harm you.

>>8810532
popsci retard

File: _1491175453.jpg (60KB, 750x562px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 750x562px

>>8810565

Why are some of you so pissed off by a genuine question? Jesus Christ...

>>8810523
>>8810475
>>8810545
>The only damaging thing electromagnetic radiation can do is ionization
That is extremely naive. Put your head in your microwave and tell me again how this radiation has less energy per photon than visible light. It's not about that. It's simply about how exactly the radiation influences a biological system, which is too complex to ever understand fully. Arguing that the radiation is not ionizing is not enough to proof that it is no doing no harm.

Anyway, there is only weak evidence for the kind of frequencies bluetooth, wifi or gsm uses doing any kind of harm to humans. And if it does cause harm, it is very likely to be very minor. So don't worry too much about it, it's probably not worth it.

>>8810563
Bluetooth is not radio you idiot, and duration of exposure DOES matter, just go out in the sun for a minute or five hours and look at your skin.

File: m_1490199770.jpg (126KB, 796x988px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 796x988px

>>8810540

>>8810563

Alright, thanks for the explanations.

File: _1491522257.jpg (117KB, 750x936px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 750x936px

>>8810572

Touche

>>8810567
because it's an extremely stupid concern that you could have figured out yourself with common sense. the light coming from your fucking monitor is more dangerous you twat

>>8810456
I have AirPods.
No brain tumors yet.
I have a weird growth on my eardrum though.

>>8810580
It really is not "extremely stupid" to question. Blindly believing shit because you read up the word "ionization" however is pretty close to what I consider extremely stupid. Electromagnetic radiation and the harm it does is not at all described by just the frequency. The impedance of electromagnetic waves is not just a function of the frequency of the waves, put also a function of the charge distribution of the target body, which can literally be arbitrarily complicated. If you really believe that we know everything about that in enough detail to not ask questions like OP did, then I seriously hope you are not studying anything physics related. We DON'T know, we can make studies and infer how likely it is that it's harmless, but that's all there is.

>>8810572
Microwave ovens have higher irradiance, and microwaves specifically have a more pronounced effect on water. Radiowaves and microwaves of the irradiance that electronics produce are harmless because even though they can't ionise, the energy imparted is basically nil.

And with regard to your second point, bluetooth IS radio, and what damages your skin is UV light. In that case, duration does have an effect, but we're not talking about UV here.

>tell me again how this radiation has less energy per photon than visible light.
E = hf, dumbass.

File: poodle-puppy-5719-2560x1600.jpg (1MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1600px

>>8810597
>hide post

it's that easy to avoid wasting your time arguing with these people. don't forget to remind your mom to buy more tinfoil.

>avatarfagging his waifu
>retarded
Okay

>>8810607
>Oversimplification of the involved system
Yeah, you can go on and on, but in the end the point still stands that the systems involved are too complex for your undergrad knowledge being sufficient to clear up all doubts. Studies ARE necessary and those studies showing that there is no significant evidence for any harm does not mean your arguments are correct.

>>8810610
Not even trying to suggest that those frequencies are harmful, just pointing out that the argumentation is ridiculously naive.

>>8810613
i'm a medical phys. post grad. your posts are you trying to make something out of nothing

>>8810618
People are wrong about shit, I'm pointing that out. I don't care what you are studying.

>>8810643
>for your undergrad knowledge being sufficient

stop making yourself look stupid. you don't seem to know much.

>>8810655
No argument

>>8810456

I'd be more worried about just losing them from falling out of your ears.

>>8810643
>cant no nuffin
Welcome to /sci/, please don't stay too long

>>8810655
>>8810660
Impartial observer here. This guy >>8810572 is right. We don't know shit about the human body.

>>8810572
nigga do you even know what watts are
your microwave is using way more power than some shitty earbuds

>>8810572
>Put your head in your microwave

such a stupid example that i wonder if you've done that yourself

>>8810713
I know obviously. The examples were meant to illustrate exactly that there's more to electromagnetic radiation than just photon energy. Intensity and exposure time are important.

>>8810723
It said exactly what I wanted it to say. Claim was that the only thing that matters is whether or not radiation is ionizing. That is obviously not the case.

>>8810731
radiation that does not ionize will not cause cancer or damage if it is low intensity
i'd wager that airbuds are <10^-4 times weaker than a microwave oven
you'd have to use them for more than ten thousand years before the intensity*exposure time figure was identical to a single minute of having your head in a microwave, and during that time your body would be regenerating itself constantly
it's like how losing a few liters of blood over the course of a minute would be fatal but losing the same amount of blood over several years would not even be detrimental

>>8810704
Sure bud. Impartial

>>8810567
Because there is so much misconception about radioactivity even in phd research papers it is not funny anymore