Wireless headset safe?

[KaminKevCrew]

50 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

There's also more differences there than just the amount of energy (for example, wave lengths). 

 

You also have to keep in mind that people will use Bluetooth headphones for hours a day and that it will be highly focused. Like I said earlier, I used bluetooth headphones heavily for a month and I just coincidentally got cancer with the largest tumor being directly beneath the transmitter? I find that to be a bit too much to just be a coincidence. It might not cause cancer (as you would have a pandemic if that were the case), but it could easily exacerbate a condition in someone who has a genetic predisposition to cancer. 

I don't think that "easily" is the right term here. Possibly would be the better term. Not to mention that you were (more than likely) already going to develop cancer anyway. It's one of those things where it's not really worth arguing about unprovable conjecture.

[79wjd]

16 minutes ago, KaminKevCrew said:

I don't think that "easily" is the right term here. Possibly would be the better term. Not to mention that you were (more than likely) already going to develop cancer anyway. It's one of those things where it's not really worth arguing about unprovable conjecture.

Well, maybe or maybe not. But the fact that it happened to develop directly beneath the transmitter after a month of heavy use seems like more than just a coincidence. But like I said, I don't think it was directly to blame, else you'd have cancer rates growing pretty substantially as wireless headphones have gained a lot of traction in the past year or so. But I am pretty confident that there was a link between the two events. Whether it just be speeding up the process or it had more of an effect is kind of irrelevant imo, the point to take home is that we really don't know enough to confidently say one way or another that wireless tech isn't dangerous. 

 

That's not to say no one should use bluetooth headphones and we should all give up our phones, but at the same time no one should be going around saying there is no health risk because the fact is that no one really knows the answer. I'm not going to stop using my phone or anything drastic like that, but I have stopped using my bluetooth headphones. I think it's important not to undermine someone's concerns without solid irrefutable evidence, which there just isn't right now. 

[chodemonger]

9 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

There's also more differences there than just the amount of energy (for example, wave lengths). 

 

You also have to keep in mind that people will use Bluetooth headphones for hours a day and that it will be highly focused. Like I said earlier, I used bluetooth headphones heavily for a month and I just coincidentally got cancer with the largest tumor being directly beneath the transmitter? I find that to be a bit too much to just be a coincidence. It might not cause cancer (as you would have a pandemic if that were the case), but it could easily exacerbate a condition in someone who has a genetic predisposition to cancer. 

Actually you will find that in fact the only difference between visible light and bluetooth signal is wavelength and magnitude. You say its highly focused but if you had 50 bluetooth devices around you all on at the same time you would have the same radio wave activity that everyone experiences all the time in every city in the world. Do you not think the the coincidence could be explained by your exposure to heavy metals or copper in the devices?

[79wjd]

43 minutes ago, chodemonger said:

Actually you will find that in fact the only difference between visible light and bluetooth signal is wavelength and magnitude. You say its highly focused but if you had 50 bluetooth devices around you all on at the same time you would have the same radio wave activity that everyone experiences all the time in every city in the world. Do you not think the the coincidence could be explained by your exposure to heavy metals or copper in the devices?

The only thing that changed was my use of bluetooth headphones rather than my SE215s. So bluetooth was the only thing that changed. 

[KaminKevCrew]

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

The only thing that changed was my use of bluetooth headphones rather than my SE215s. So bluetooth was the only thing that changed. 

Other than the fact that the cables in the SE215 is made of copper, which could easily have had just a great an effect. It could also be to blame from taking phone calls on your cell over a prolonged period of time. This is why I'm saying it's a bit silly to blame the bluetooth. It could be any of an immense number of things. Just because bluetooth was the most recent change doesn't mean that it was the effective change. Hell, switching to bluetooth could have slightly prolonged the development there. As you said, not enough is known about this stuff. As such, why not just say nothing? We don't know enough either way, so really, what difference does it make? 

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, KaminKevCrew said:

Other than the fact that the cables in the SE215 is made of copper, which could easily have had just a great an effect. It could also be to blame from taking phone calls on your cell over a prolonged period of time. This is why I'm saying it's a bit silly to blame the bluetooth. It could be any of an immense number of things. Just because bluetooth was the most recent change doesn't mean that it was the effective change. Hell, switching to bluetooth could have slightly prolonged the development there. As you said, not enough is known about this stuff. As such, why not just say nothing? We don't know enough either way, so really, what difference does it make? 

By that same logic everyone who said wireless headsets are safe should also say nothing.

 

Oh, and I rarely talk on the phone, and when I do it's almost always on speaker with the phone at least a foot away and I've been using my SE215s for years now, so again, bluetooth is the only difference. And you're right, it could have been any number of things, but the likelihood of it being caused by something else when it just so happened to occur after heavy extended bluetooth use and in the exact location of the transmitter is quite the coincidence. 

[KaminKevCrew]

47 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

By that same logic everyone who said wireless headsets are safe should also say nothing.

That's exactly what I was saying. People should really only say "There isn't enough evidence to support either end of the camp. It may or it may not harm you."

[Space Reptile]

if the wireless headset has a potential to harm you , your wifi router would have killed you way before the headset would 

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, Space Reptile said:

if the wireless headset has a potential to harm you , your wifi router would have killed you way before the headset would 

That's not exactly a fair comparison due to how wifi is far less focused, and devices receiving/transmitting wifi are generally not pressed against your head/neck/torso area (i.e. the more sensitive areas). 

[Space Reptile]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

That's not exactly a fair comparison due to how wifi is far less focused. 

wireless headsets usually use prettymuch the same technology , just on  a differend frequency , mine ran on 800something mhz , wireless rus on 2.4ghz , walkie talkies around 300~600 mhz there about (i could be wrong but thats what mine said in the manual back in the day) , basic wireless radio Transmission tech , you dont die by standing next to a radio tower  or standing infront of a boats radar dish ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

[79wjd]

17 minutes ago, Space Reptile said:

wireless headsets usually use prettymuch the same technology , just on  a differend frequency , mine ran on 800something mhz , wireless rus on 2.4ghz , walkie talkies around 300~600 mhz there about (i could be wrong but thats what mine said in the manual back in the day) , basic wireless radio Transmission tech , you dont die by standing next to a radio tower  or standing infront of a boats radar dish ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

Next to a radio tower is actually the place with the weakest signal. 

 

And how many people sit in front of a radar dish for extended periods of time? (the answer is basically none). 

[ttoks]

On 13/09/2016 at 0:15 AM, djdwosk97 said:

Over an extended period (5+ hours a day, multiple days a week), even xrays/gamma rays will pose a health risk.

There is also no proof to the contrary, however there is proof that exposure to even low level cell phone radiation can be a potential risk. 

Where? Can you link a comprehensive study showing that's the case? If you look hard enough you'll always find evidence that supports your position, that doesn't make it true, a basic understanding of the science involved gives alot of understanding to this sort of stuff, and the fact of the matter is the signal strength and type of electromagnetic radiation involved simply isn't harmful.

 

Also, correlation does not mean causation, just about everyone the develops cancer in the western world is exposed to radio signals, that doesn't mean they're causing cancer, but feel free you move to an uninhabited island to prevent WiFi induced cancer if your fear of it outweigh's your common sense.

[79wjd]

12 minutes ago, ttoks said:

Where? Can you link a comprehensive study showing that's the case? If you look hard enough you'll always find evidence that supports your position, that doesn't make it true, a basic understanding of the science involved gives alot of understanding to this sort of stuff, and the fact of the matter is the signal strength and type of electromagnetic radiation involved simply isn't harmful.

 

Also, correlation does not mean causation, just about everyone the develops cancer in the western world is exposed to radio signals, that doesn't mean they're causing cancer, but feel free you move to an uninhabited island to prevent WiFi induced cancer if your fear of it outweigh's your common sense.

Can you link me a comprehensive study proving otherwise? Not that that would even matter seeing as doctors contradict themselves every other year....just look at coffee as an example. Coffee's recent medical history went something like this: "coffee is bad for you, coffee is good for you....it turns out we were wrong, coffee is actually bad for you, wait, never mind it's good for you." And a report was also linked earlier showing a possible relation between bluetooth signals and cancer. 

 

I never said anything about avoiding all radio waves, just that one shouldn't be making a claim like bluetooth has no negative effects, because frankly, we do not know. 

[rockon5622]

If the headset is very heavy maybe it could cause neckpain. But with regards to the wireless part, do you live in an area with wifi, cell service, or radio. If so you are experiencing the same waves. It is not harmful because it is low power and low frequency. 

[rockon5622]

On 9/13/2016 at 6:51 PM, djdwosk97 said:

Can you link me a comprehensive study proving otherwise? Not that that would even matter seeing as doctors contradict themselves every other year....just look at coffee as an example. Coffee's recent medical history went something like this: "coffee is bad for you, coffee is good for you....it turns out we were wrong, coffee is actually bad for you, wait, never mind it's good for you." And a report was also linked earlier showing a possible relation between bluetooth signals and cancer. 

 

I never said anything about avoiding all radio waves, just that one shouldn't be making a claim like bluetooth has no negative effects, because frankly, we do not know. 

Do you go outside? If so sunlight is far far more harmful than anything wireless signals could do.

[KaminKevCrew]

Just now, rockon5622 said:

Do you go outside? If so sunlight is far far more harmful than anything wireless signals could do.

why the thread necro, then double post? Especially since we've already been through all of those points in this thread...

[rockon5622]

Oops, forgot to check post date

[79wjd]

7 minutes ago, rockon5622 said:

Do you go outside? If so sunlight is far far more harmful than anything wireless signals could do.

No, I don't spend 6 hours a day baking in the sun because I'm not a moron.