wireless headphone use and Radio Frequency Radiation

[pulltabfelix]

I have an Equinox 800 and use wired headphones connected to the WM-08 clipped to my belt.

gives me < 10 ms latency and keeps the RFR away from my head.

Some in the scientific community say that RFR is not good for you near your head. As for me, why take a chance when the WM-08 is a good alternative? I do something similar with my iPhone. I always use the speaker rather than pressing the iphone up next to my head. There is lots of RFR around us in the modern world and I try to limit my exposure to non-essential RFR.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Bayoutalker]

To each his own but it kind of defeats part of the benefit of bluetooth. I hate dealing with the cord even if it is not attached to the detector.

 

[pulltabfelix]

To each his own but it kind of defeats part of the benefit of bluetooth. I hate dealing with the cord even if it is not attached to the detector.

yes but to me avoiding bluetooth radiation is a priority to me. I have no problem with the WM-08 on my belt up to my headphones. not ideal, but better than connected to the detector that gets in the way each time you need to recover a target. Each to their own method that works best for them of course.

 

[vferrari]

The issue regarding BT safety seems to crop up year after year in sensationalistic, self serving (to the organizations that generate the information) press releases but seldom with enough facts to further bolster the claim. I have linked to relatively recent articles on both sides of the issue. They are both written primarily touting facts rather than emotionally sensationalistic claims and are good reads.

Point: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/are-wireless-headphones-dangerous#The-bottom-line

Counterpoint: https://www.soundguys.com/is-bluetooth-dangerous-18735/

As an engineer I line up with the counterpoint camp.

It seems logical to avoid unnecessary risks, but risk is comprised of both consequence and liklihood.

The consequence of brain cancer is high, the liklihood of it occuring due to exposure to head worn bluetooth devices is very low simply based on the very low exposure levels involved rendering the overall risk as low. Note in the first linked article (the one that leans towards bluetooth headphones being potentially harmful or at least of unknown liklihood harm) the FCC maximum acceptable Specific Absortion Rate (i.e., mass energy density per second) is 1.6 watts/kg while apple earpods max out at .466 W/kg. The second article does a credible job of explaining the huge diffrence in RF radiation absorption rates used in relatively inconclusive studies of health effects on lab animals vs. the real world exposure rates of casual bluetooth device usage and we are talking 3 to 4 orders of magnitude difference in exposure rates (i.e., factors of up to 10,000 times difference).

I agree with minimizing risks to the extent practical, especially if absolute risks are unknown, but when placed in the context of all the other risks you are exposed to during detecting including the RF radiation from the detector itself (especially from the control head and coil), all the other environmental RF radiation out there from cell towers, to broadcast stations, to power lines, and wi-fi transmitters, not to mention the ionizing radiation from sun exposure that we know definitively causes skin cancer, to the risk of driving your car to the hunt site, it is like worrying about being irritated by few grains in a shoeful of harmful sand.

Nevertheless, I don't begrudge anyone taking the "better safe than sorry" route, especially since the WM08 provides a suitable though only marginally safer alternative (since IMO the overall risk is infinitesimal to begin with).

Anyway, I encourage folks to read the articles and make up their own minds.

 

[SanMan]

I have an Equinox 800 and use wired headphones connected to the WM-08 clipped to my belt.

gives me < 10 ms latency and keeps the RFR away from my head.

Some in the scientific community say that RFR is not good for you near your head. As for me, why take a chance when the WM-08 is a good alternative? I do something similar with my iPhone. I always use the speaker rather than pressing the iphone up next to my head. There is lots of RFR around us in the modern world and I try to limit my exposure to non-essential RFR.

"Said the smartest man in the room"

You are 100% Correct

These guys should read the book,.........

"Dirty Electricity"

Look here,.......

Plenty on the subject of how people are screwing up their health with this modern crap.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=dirty+electricity+book&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIv_Kk5qnK5gIVj8hkCh34GAlfEAAYAiAAEgLKs_D_BwE&hvadid=241611836307&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=1024403&hvnetw=s&hvpos=1t2&hvqmt=e&hvrand=18018018668733936226&hvtargid=kwd-322296887946&hydadcr=22562_10354929&tag=googhydr-20&ref=pd_sl_1kq8cs1ldx_e

Wait till 5G is widespread, it will be a mess,..... even for those not using the devices.

 

[IN DA HOLE]

 

[vferrari]

"Said the smartest man in the room"

You are 100% Correct

These guys should read the book,.........

"Dirty Electricity"

Look here,.......

Plenty on the subject of how people are screwing up their health with this modern crap.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=dirty+electricity+book&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIv_Kk5qnK5gIVj8hkCh34GAlfEAAYAiAAEgLKs_D_BwE&hvadid=241611836307&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=1024403&hvnetw=s&hvpos=1t2&hvqmt=e&hvrand=18018018668733936226&hvtargid=kwd-322296887946&hydadcr=22562_10354929&tag=googhydr-20&ref=pd_sl_1kq8cs1ldx_e

Wait till 5G is widespread, it will be a mess,..... even for those not using the devices.

I have Dr. Milham's book and while it is an interesting read (I need to really dig into it some more), am disappointed in some of its factual inconsistencies regarding the electrical science and the weak causal linkages between between the "dirty electricity" examples and the epidemiological data that I came across in my scan of the entire book. I am not saying there are NOT some health effects, but far from conclusive that any health effects he cites are indeed causally linked or significant. For example, he cites a study he did of amateur radio operators and cancer rates and noted that the operators that had higher license classes appeared to have higher rates of cancer. He attributed this to use of higher power levels and higher frequency operations. His reasoning is flawed however since it was not clear that he accounted for the age of the operators (Extra Class operators usually are more experienced and older than novice operators), did not have a general population age control group for comparison, and it is not necessary to have a higher class license to operate higher power, high frequency RF equipment which he states is a prime "dirty electricity" offender. Despite these types of flaws he makes some good points, but the fact that he carries an "mircrosurge" meter everywhere he goes and is concerned even about the EMF associated with steel-belted radial tires makes me wonder about his paranoia level and motivations. Looking into this microsurge meter business appears to be a way for the meter manufacturer to sell electrical filters to people who are measuring high levels of "dirty electricity" in their homes.

Your alarmist statement regarding 5G makes me wonder why you are not also concerned about using the the no less than 10 high energy EMF emitters in your profile - aka your metal detectors. [I know, I know, most of them are sitting in your garage unused and aren't going to be transmitting full time like those microgrid 5G towers - but my point is this might be the wrong hobby to pursue if you believe high energy electromagnetic fields beyond BT headsets are a significant health concern]

Anyway, thanks for the link. EMF and its health effects should not be ignored, but people should really vet where they are getting their information on the subject because there is a lot of pseudo science alarmist info and reputation trashing being put out there on both sides of the issue which is always the case when a lot of money is at stake. Whether its the dirty electricity alarmists or the phone manufacturers, bluetooth electronics companies, telecommunications firms, or energy companies - everyone seems to have the almighty dollar in their sights as a way to capitalize on the issue regardless of what side they are on. SMH.

I am keeping an eye on this issue, but as an engineer need solid facts to make a pragmatic decision, and so far I have seen nothing conclusive on this and my engineering background makes me skeptical that BT devices are something I really need to be concerned about right now when I measure all the parameters that go into the health risk equation. That is my opinion - and I know that I am not the smartest guy in the room nor am I 100% right, so like I said, everyone should decide on their own and no one else has the right to judge their decision. I know the OP and respect his decision to keep BT and other RF sources away from his head. Nothing wrong with better safe than sorry as I said before. Just make your decisions armed with the best facts available.

 

[Jason in Enid]

Reminds of the stories I have heard about when homes first began getting electricity. There were people who refused to have it in their homes because thought that dangerous electricity would just leak out of the sockets. People fear what they dont understand.

 

[SanMan]

I have Dr. Milham's book and while it is an interesting read (I need to really dig into it some more), am disappointed in some of its factual inconsistencies regarding the electrical science and the weak causal linkages between between the "dirty electricity" examples and the epidemiological data that I came across in my scan of the entire book. I am not saying there are NOT some health effects, but far from conclusive that any health effects he cites are indeed causally linked or significant. For example, he cites a study he did of amateur radio operators and cancer rates and noted that the operators that had higher license classes appeared to have higher rates of cancer. He attributed this to use of higher power levels and higher frequency operations. His reasoning is flawed however since it was not clear that he accounted for the age of the operators (Extra Class operators usually are more experienced and older than novice operators), did not have a general population age control group for comparison, and it is not necessary to have a higher class license to operate higher power, high frequency RF equipment which he states is a prime "dirty electricity" offender. Despite these types of flaws he makes some good points, but the fact that he carries an "mircrosurge" meter everywhere he goes and is concerned even about the EMF associated with steel-belted radial tires makes me wonder about his paranoia level and motivations. Looking into this microsurge meter business appears to be a way for the meter manufacturer to sell electrical filters to people who are measuring high levels of "dirty electricity" in their homes.

Your alarmist statement regarding 5G makes me wonder why you are not also concerned about using the the no less than 10 high energy EMF emitters in your profile - aka your metal detectors.

Anyway, thanks for the link. EMF and its health effects should not be ignored, but people should really vet where they are getting their information on the subject because there is a lot of pseudo science alarmist info and reputation trashing being put out there on both sides of the issue which is always the case when a lot of money is at stake. Whether its the dirty electricity alarmists or the phone manufacturers, bluetooth electronics companies, telecommunications firms, or energy companies - everyone seems to have the almighty dollar in their sights as a way to capitalize on the issue regardless of what side they are on. SMH.

I am keeping an eye on this issue, but as an engineer need solid facts to make a decision, and so far I have seen nothing conclusive on this and my engineering background makes me skeptical that BT devices are something I really need to be concerned about right now when I measure all the parameters that go into the risk equation.

I liked your post because you, at least in a moderate way, agree that electricity can cause harm
In some instances.

Some people are more sensitive to these modern wave generating devices.
Two people I know personally were miserable after their power meter was swapped out
for the "new wonderful wireless meter"

Caused a big deal for enough people that there was a meeting at city hall
the city told the dept. Water & Power that they had to offer an option.
A bunch of people pay a fee to use the old school meter.

Better than your ears ringing, can't sleep, on edge and uptight.

Small but blatant example.

We will talk more, but I gotta go.

Have a good one

 

[Timecop67]

Probably not enough energy in bluetooth stuff to be at all concerned with. I however limit my usage on the higher wattage cell phone and use a regular land line for most calls. Isn't cancer mainly virus caused anyway? but can also be environmental in nature changing our bodies on the cell level.

 

[vferrari]

Probably not enough energy in bluetooth stuff to be at all concerned with. I however limit my usage on the higher wattage cell phone and use a regular land line for most calls. Isn't cancer mainly virus caused anyway? but can also be environmental in nature changing our bodies on the cell level.

Yes, it is the cellular level changes that can cause problems, but ionising radiation (high energy electromagnetic fields) such as those caused by UV radiation, x-rays and gamma rays from radioactive elements are proven to cause cellular damage by knocking electrons off atoms in the cell. RF fields do not have the energy to do this and are considered non-ionizing. But that does not mean no harm can be done. Unfortunately, the studies done on lab animals to show potential biological harm from non-ionizing RF energy involves exposure levels at very high power levels and for time periods that exceed that most humans would be exposed to (1000 to 10,000 times greater) in any reasonable exposure scenario. And even then, the results are subject to debate regarding whether a causal link actually exists.

 

[pulltabfelix]

as a general rule I am distrustful of some corporations when their marketing and finance departments makes all the decisions. Many instances of certain corporations saying a product is safe.

1. cigarettes
2. vaping products
3. the sugar industry created a very effective stealth campaign to indicate dairy products were the big bad health issue causing health issues when all along it was sugar.
4. cell phones did not have enough testing by independent firms and they were just introduced and bingo millions of people had them near their heads hours on time.
5. children everywhere are using cell phones up close to their face watching videos - even 3 year olds - see it everywhere. cell phones check in with their mothership multiple times each hour broadcasting radiation near the kids head.
6. constant video game use with teenagers watching violent games including rape and murder. Video game industry is larger than the movie and tv industry.
7. pinto
8. air bags that were defective and put in millions of cars
9. a poor upgrade of the 737 to the 736 max to save on brand new certification costs and then a software fix (with no training) that brought down two airliners.

you know the list goes on and on.

no it is not about wearing a tin foil hat, it is being aware of the profit motive of corporations that trump every other concern. Most corporation's PR department focus on making the corporation look warm and fuzzy and to defect any concerns about product safety in the long term. No I am not a liberal, I am a conservative who thinks there is a deep state that is being paid by corporate donation that fails to investigate these issues in a real manner as opposed to holding some light weight public hearings with the conclusion that all is well.

 

[Donut]

Well I question the radiation.
You may have to throw your equinox away because it is what transmits the Bluetooth to the WM-08 and the headphones.
The WM-O8 and the headphones are only receivers and do not transmit a Bluetooth signal.

Doug

 

[Ziggy-Grimm]

I think I'm more likely to die from accidentally hanging my self on the corded headphone's cord getting caught on brush than I am from Bluetooth cancer-causing radiation.

Bluetooth it is!!

 

[Toecutter]

Don't dare step foot in a hospital, your head just might explode from signal leakage...

 

[SanMan]

Yes, it is the cellular level changes that can cause problems, but ionising radiation (high energy electromagnetic fields) such as those caused by UV radiation, x-rays and gamma rays from radioactive elements are proven to cause cellular damage by knocking electrons off atoms in the cell. RF fields do not have the energy to do this and are considered non-ionizing. But that does not mean no harm can be done. Unfortunately, the studies done on lab animals to show potential biological harm from non-ionizing RF energy involves exposure levels at very high power levels and for time periods that exceed that most humans would be exposed to (1000 to 10,000 times greater) in any reasonable exposure scenario. And even then, the results are subject to debate regarding whether a causal link actually exists.

Ok, first off I really don't go chasing down links very often,......

From my memory,.........

"Sweden immediately embraced wireless phone technology 20 years prior to the U.S."

They even pulled up all of their hard wired system.

So as time rolled on, both the drawbacks and benefits were 20 years advanced compared
to here in the U.S.

As were the ill effects,......

First to show up again and again, inner ear tumors.
Then it began showing up in children,......
The government responded with suggested reduced use time, ect.

The problem grew,.....

The problem became so severe that the government placed a minimum
age to use a cell phone,.... if memory serves, 14 years old or so.

Now keep in mind,...... "Please Keep In Mind"

These people had a "20 year head start"


The End

 

[vferrari]

Even the American Cancer Society can’t seem to get excited about this and the following link to the write up cites a Danish study of cell phone subscribers starting in the early 1980’s that did not demonstrate a causal link to tumors. And recognize, we are talking cell phones in these studies, not BT level signals (the original subject of the thread) which are transmitted at significantly lower power levels. I only bring this up because the ACS cell phone article is really comprehensive and I would have thought they would reference a definitive causal link to tumors if one was established with certainty in Sweden (like you mentioned), but no mention of it.

Again, I provide the link so people can make up their own minds based on published factual material. ACS article seems pretty unbiased.

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phones.html

 

[Mudflap]

Gotta put a lot of this in some perspective. For example people are worried about 60 hz EMF in their home. I used to measure EMF for a utility program. You can get readings anywhere current goes through an inductor (Electro Magnetic Force). I've been in homes taking measurements that are the norm for a residential home, (1-3 mg) however in one case the homeowner had a big parrot in a cage on the kitchen counter. There was parrot crap splattered all over the adjacent counter top where she was preparing food! Many times took readings in homes that had chem-lawn signs all over the place. Customers smoking cigarettes, spraying ant killer inside, etc. Like everything else put it in some perspective with every thing else in the environment.

 

[pulltabfelix]

Well I question the radiation.
You may have to throw your equinox away because it is what transmits the Bluetooth to the WM-08 and the headphones.
The WM-O8 and the headphones are only receivers and do not transmit a Bluetooth signal.

Doug

That makes sense since the bluetooth head phones have nothing to transmit since they really don't talk much back to the 800.

just wish the minelab headphones sounded better but to me they don't. So I will stick with the Miccus SR-71 plugged into the wm-08 module clipped to my belt. New Miccus headphones don't talk to the 800.

 

[bowser]

i may be old and dumb but who wants to be on the road with driver less tractor trailers, sit somewhere while your car ,charges, find your home electric bill sky rocket after you spend a grand or so for a house charger, how about a driverless ambulance with you and 2 emts in the back.how about robots ending up smarter than we are and we end up scared stiff of them.I got a e-series mxt with grey ghost head phones, I gotta worry about some nit wit hackin my pacemakerHH JIM