Home » Health » Your Castrated Cell Phone Might Kill You


Coronal MRI with contrast of a glioblastoma WHO grade IV in a 15-year-old male. (Was this cell phone related? There is no proof BUT the risk is VERY avoidable!!) Perhaps this poor kid ate too many nitrite laced hot dogs, a definite risk factor. See my “Dogs of Death” post on this subject..

For the last several years, the companies making cell phones have come up with a harebrained idea; remove external antennas to make the cell phones look pretty even though, they end up working pretty badly.

clip_image003clip_image004clip_image005clip_image006 They all look beautiful BUT are the Marketing Weasels subjecting consumers to an unnecessary risk?!!

Without an antenna, the cell phone receives a far weaker signal from the cell site. In response, the phone raises its output power. Not only, does this decrease battery life, but worse, it sends an extra large dose of microwave radiation directly into the brain of the user. It gets even nastier: the cell phone is typically pressed directly against the side of the user’s head. If the phone had an external antenna, it would produce a far less concentrated signal which would also be considerably further from the user’s brain.

If the distance from the antenna to the brain is, for example increased by a factor of four, the radiation received by the brain tissue is reduced by a factor of 16. Of course, the reverse is also true. A cell phone with an adjustable, pullout antenna would most probably is sending is radiation in all directions at a distance several inches from the user’s brain.

With the external antenna removed, the brain is perhaps half an inch from the device’s internal antenna, which with, the inverse square law means a huge increase in microwave brain bombardment Furthermore, typically the user has their hand over the phone thus absorbing much of the cell signal, both that transmitted by the phone and by the cell site.

This further weakens the received signal and therefore the programming in the cell phone interprets this as a distant cell site requiring increased transmitting output. I do not understand why we are not given the option of a removable external antenna.

If users find an external antenna to be ugly, they can be given the option of having no antenna, with the knowledge that they will have far more dropped calls, distorted and weak reception and far more cell radiation impinging on their brain. I am advanced class amateur radio operator and have designed and built my own antennas for radio transceivers. A Cell phone is simply a microwave radio transceiver. Everything I have stated here would be well understood by any licensed amateur radio operator.

  We have all heard the constant drumbeat of greedy lawyers drumming up lawsuits from the asbestos debacle. This has been a multibillion-dollar disaster. The asbestos industry knew for decades that its product was extremely hazardous, especially to people who also smoke cigarettes. They chose to cover up the problem and not only were these companies driven into bankruptcy, many other companies who innocently use their products have suffered catastrophic losses.

I am very concerned as an investor in several companies involved with the cell phone industry that should there be proof of a relationship between brain diseases and cell phone radiation, Verizon, AT&T and others could be financially ruined by an avalanche of lawsuits. I do not understand why they are taking this risk. At least, these companies should do everything possible to minimize any risk from using these extremely useful devices.

Cell phones are one of the great inventions of the last few decades; there is no reason to take unnecessary not only to cell phone users but to the entire industry.

In conclusion, the cell phone companies could easily state that while they see no reason to believe that cell phone radiation presents a cancer risk, just to be safe they are minimizing any possible problem by placing external antennas on the devices and also using shielding on the side of the cell phone facing the user’s head.

To Reiterate The Main Points

1. Cell phones without antennas have poor reception; a cell phone is a radio transceiver. Transmitters and receivers work far better with antennas

2.Having an antenna on a cell phone reduces the need for transmitting power and prolongs battery life

3. When a cell phone has no external antenna, the users hand is likely to absorb most of the signal since cell phone radiation is the same as that in a microwave oven and therefore it will be absorbed by the water in human flesh.

4. Should brain cancer or other serious risk from cell phones be proven, the cell phone producers could be subjected to very large lawsuits since they should have known that using internal antennas greatly increase any such risk.


No comments yet... Be the first to leave a reply!

Leave a Reply