Mountain Bikes · Public discussion

Cell Phone Risks

Started by Mike Vandeman · · Last activity · 41 posts · 1,899 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Mountain Bikes
Published
6 November 2006
Last activity
8 December 2006
Original author
Mike Vandeman
Posts
41
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,899
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 41
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 09:41:05 -0800, cc said about:
    Re: Cell Phone Risks

    Quoted message said:

    Mike Vandeman wrote:

    ......................snip

    Quoted message said:

    Mike, you may as well have
    posted this:
    http://zapatopi.net/afdb/

    it says:
    Welcome to the AFDB Website

    "This site is dedicated to spreading the word about the
    Aluminum* Foil Deflector Beanie and how it can help the
    average human. Here you will find a description of AFDBs,
    how to make and use them, and general information about
    related subjects. I hope that you find the AFDB Homepage to
    be an important source of AFDB know-how and advocacy....."

    I LUVS IT!!!!

    Quoted message said:

    You are truly unbelievable.

    I think he has a humiliation fetish.
    No, really...Our resposes turn him on.
    --Doug


  2. Quoted message said:

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------


    What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored] science? Or
    have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't help
    but but throw in with other scam artists...?

  3. On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:11:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------


    What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored] science? Or
    have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't help
    but but throw in with other scam artists...?

    I see you can't read any better than you reason. I didn't write that.
    ===
    I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
    humans ("pure habitat"😉. Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
    years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

    Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

  4. "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:11:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------


    What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored] science?
    Or
    have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't help
    but but throw in with other scam artists...?

    I see you can't read any better than you reason. I didn't write that.
    ===


    You POSTED it which lends YOUR endorsement of statements made.
    I see your accountability continues to be no better than your research
    skills.

  5. On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 13:49:16 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:11:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    > ---------------------------
    > Balance yourself, find out more...
    > http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    > ---------------------------
    >
    What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored] science?
    Or
    have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't help
    but but throw in with other scam artists...?

    I see you can't read any better than you reason. I didn't write that.
    ===


    You POSTED it which lends YOUR endorsement of statements made.
    I see your accountability continues to be no better than your research
    skills.

    "Post" = "endorse"? I see you can'r reason any better than you can
    read. Idiot.
    ===
    I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
    humans ("pure habitat"😉. Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
    years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

    Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

  6. "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 13:49:16 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:11:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    >
    >> ---------------------------
    >> Balance yourself, find out more...
    >> http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    >> ---------------------------
    >>
    >What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    >Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored] science?
    >Or
    >have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't
    >help
    >but but throw in with other scam artists...?

    I see you can't read any better than you reason. I didn't write that.
    ===


    You POSTED it which lends YOUR endorsement of statements made.
    I see your accountability continues to be no better than your research
    skills.

    "Post" = "endorse"? I see you can'r reason any better than you can
    read. Idiot.
    ===


    Then EXPLAIN your reason for posting it if you do not believe it had any
    relevance or truth. Either you believe it or you don't. Either it is rubbish
    or it is not.
    WHICH IS IT?

  7. On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 19:47:37 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 13:49:16 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...
    > On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:11:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>> ---------------------------
    >>> Balance yourself, find out more...
    >>> http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    >>> ---------------------------
    >>>
    >>What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    >>Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored] science?
    >>Or
    >>have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't
    >>help
    >>but but throw in with other scam artists...?
    >
    > I see you can't read any better than you reason. I didn't write that.
    > ===
    You POSTED it which lends YOUR endorsement of statements made.
    I see your accountability continues to be no better than your research
    skills.

    "Post" = "endorse"? I see you can'r reason any better than you can
    read. Idiot.
    ===


    Then EXPLAIN your reason for posting it if you do not believe it had any
    relevance or truth. Either you believe it or you don't. Either it is rubbish
    or it is not.
    WHICH IS IT?

    Who cares? In any case, "Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm" is irrelevant.
    ===
    I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
    humans ("pure habitat"😉. Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
    years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

    Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

  8. "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 19:47:37 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 13:49:16 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    >news:[email hidden]...
    >> On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:11:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> ---------------------------
    >>>> Balance yourself, find out more...
    >>>> http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    >>>> ---------------------------
    >>>>
    >>>What's next...? Dianetics, Tom Cruise and Scientology?
    >>>Did synanon sap all of your resistence to scams, cults and [censored]
    >>>science?
    >>>Or
    >>>have you been pushing your own brand of science for so long you can't
    >>>help
    >>>but but throw in with other scam artists...?
    >>
    >> I see you can't read any better than you reason. I didn't write that.
    >> ===
    >You POSTED it which lends YOUR endorsement of statements made.
    >I see your accountability continues to be no better than your research
    >skills.

    "Post" = "endorse"? I see you can'r reason any better than you can
    read. Idiot.
    ===


    Then EXPLAIN your reason for posting it if you do not believe it had any
    relevance or truth. Either you believe it or you don't. Either it is
    rubbish
    or it is not.
    WHICH IS IT?

    Who cares? In any case, "Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm" is irrelevant.
    ===


    So everything coming from it is also irrelevant.

  9. Gave up mine two years ago. Don't own an Ipod. I am not a cyborg!

  10. "Treebeard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Gave up mine two years ago. Don't own an Ipod. I am not a cyborg!

    just an idiot

  11. di said:

    "Treebeard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Gave up mine two years ago. Don't own an Ipod. I am not a cyborg!

    just an idiot

    Aside from his last sentence, what is idiotic about not owning a
    cell phone or an ipod, as long as you treat it as an individual
    choice? Some people live in areas with very poor to non-existent
    cell-phone service, which sounds like an excellent reason not to
    get one. Someone who stays mostly at home doesn't need an ipod
    either, particular if there is already an ample CD collection
    on hand.

  12. "Bill Z." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    di said:

    "Treebeard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Gave up mine two years ago. Don't own an Ipod. I am not a cyborg!

    just an idiot

    Aside from his last sentence, what is idiotic about not owning a
    cell phone or an ipod, as long as you treat it as an individual
    choice? Some people live in areas with very poor to non-existent
    cell-phone service, which sounds like an excellent reason not to
    get one. Someone who stays mostly at home doesn't need an ipod
    either, particular if there is already an ample CD collection
    on hand.

    Hey, theres too much living and riding to do to worry about iPods and mobile
    phones

    Bradders

  13. "Bill Z." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    di said:

    "Treebeard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Gave up mine two years ago. Don't own an Ipod. I am not a cyborg!

    just an idiot

    Aside from his last sentence, what is idiotic about not owning a
    cell phone or an ipod, as long as you treat it as an individual
    choice?

    I don't know, I've never owed a cell phone or Ipod either, it's the attitude
    I was referring to.

  14. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2488946,00.html

    As stated by SCIENTISTS based on RESEARCH rather than uninformed
    OPINION! How inconvenient....

    And, for the record, I don't own a mobile phone and probably never
    will.

    Mike Vandeman said:

    Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:40:33 PM
    Subject: Cell Phone Risks - You Don't Deserve Brain Cancer!

    Some people appear to have an almost pathological emotional
    attachment to their cell phones and there is a fascinating
    suggestion that cell radiation pulses might actually be addictive to
    the human brain. We can't save those who would rather die than
    switch. But ethics compelled us to ensure that all reasonable
    people have access to the basic scientific facts.

    Your cell phone is a microwave transmitter and it should bear a
    cancer warning, Microwave energy oscillates at millions to billions
    of cycles per second. The Journal of Cellular Biochemistry reports
    that these frequencies cause cancer and other diseases by
    interfering with cellular DNA and its repair mechanisms. Microwave
    promotes rapid cell aging. Italian scientists have recently
    demonstrated that cell phone radiation makes cancerous cells grow
    aggressively. Cordless phones marked 900 megahertz or 2.4
    gigahertz emits the same dangerous microwave radiation as cell
    phones.

    The connection between microwave exposure and cancer has been
    documented for years. During the Cold War, the Soviets irradiated
    the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, Russia, with low level, twin-beam
    microwave radiation. Two successive ambassadors developed
    leukemia. Other staffers also developed cancer, or their blood
    showed DNA damage, which precedes cancer.

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------

    Research by University of Washington professor Dr. Henry Lai
    shows brain cells are clearly damaged by microwave levels far
    below the U.S. government's 'safety' guidelines. Dr. Lai notes that
    even tiny doses of radio frequency can cumulate over time and
    lead to harmful effects. He warns that public exposure to radiation
    from wireless transmitters 'should be limited to a minimum.'

    Motorola advises consumers to avoid pointing a cellular antenna
    toward exposed parts of the body. But independent tests show that
    cell phones can also leak huge amounts of radiation from the
    keypad and mouthpiece. This radiation deeply penetrates brain, ear
    and eye tissues, which are especially susceptible to microwave
    damage. Belt clip cases allow cell phones to deliver radiation to the
    liver or kidney areas when a wired, hands-free earpiece is used.

    Recent studies confirm that cell and cordless phone microwave can:

    * Damage nerves in the scalp

    * Cause blood cells to leak hemoglobin

    * Cause memory loss and mental confusion

    * Cause headaches and induce extreme fatigue

    * Create joint pain, muscle spasms and tremors

    * Create burning sensation and rash on the skin

    * Alter the brain's electrical activity during sleep

    * Induce ringing in the ears, impair sense of smell

    * Precipitate cataracts, retina damage and eye cancer

    * Open the blood-brain barrier to viruses and toxins

    * Reduce the number and efficiency of white blood cells

    * Stimulate asthma by producing histamine in mast cells

    * Cause digestive problems and raise bad cholesterol levels

    * Stress the endocrine system, especially pancreas, thyroid,
    ovaries, testes

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------

    In 1993, the telecom industry committed $25 million dollars for a
    series of research projects designed to prove that cell phones are
    safe. The studies proved just the opposite. They proved that
    federal microwave exposure standards are dangerously inadequate.
    Cell damage and tumors can be easily induced in the lab at about
    one third of the FCC's exposure guidelines.

    The telecom boys panicked. They and their lackey politicians and
    federal regulators decided the only lucrative thing to do was to LIE
    and DENY. Despite damning evidence, the FDA still prevaricates:
    'There is no reason to conclude that there are health risks posed by
    cell phones to consumers.' Meantime, the telecom industry has
    been pressing to INCREASE BY MORE THAN 10 TIMES the
    allowable human exposure to cell phone radiation!

    Luckily, Dr. George Carlo headed up the industry's study project.
    He presents the shocking facts in his book, Cell Phones: Invisible
    Hazards in the Wireless Age: An Insider's Alarming Discoveries
    about Cancer and Genetic Damage (Carroll and Graf, 2001). A
    summary of Dr. Carlo's book is this: Cell phones are hot, adequate
    protective regulations are naught, and Americans are being 'fried'
    so that the deceitful telecom industry can rake it in. It's dirty
    business as usual, and the longer the industry can con the public,
    the more billions it collects.

    On June 16, 2002, CBS aired a Sixty Minutes segment which
    confirmed the telecom industry is about as grungy as it gets. CBS
    producers accused major phone service providers of cheating,
    scamming, forging signatures, switching phone service without
    permission and lying about charges. The attorney general of
    Connecticut stated that despite millions of dollars in fines each
    year,
    these companies remain incorrigible. Should we trust this industry
    with our brain tissues and our very lives?

    Microwave to the head is extremely hazardous to children. Parents
    in some European nations are now warned to keep children away
    from cell phones. A University of Utah researcher found the younger
    the child, the more radiation is absorbed by the brain. Spanish
    researchers have shown that cell phones can alter electrical activity
    of a child's brain for hours, causing drastic mood changes and
    possible behavior and learning disabilities. Scientists fear that cell
    phone radiation could damage human embryos.
    Pregnant women are advised to be wary.

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------

    A cell phone must greatly increase its field strength to maintain
    communications within the metallic cage of an auto. Thus, the effect
    of microwave radiation inside a vehicle is especially intense.
    Volkswagen of Europe has warned that cell phone usage inside a car
    can be 'injurious to health due to the extremely high electromagnetic
    fields generated.'

    Insurance studies in England showed that an average driver talking
    on a cell is actually more impaired in function and reaction time than
    a drunk. Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority reports that
    one hour of exposure to mobile phone radiation can cause human
    cells to shrink. Researchers believe this is due to increased protein
    activity, an indicator of cell damage. What an unstable world needs
    now is a global population afflicted with incredible shrinking brains!

    Brain cancer rates in USA have increased by 25% since 1975.
    In 2001, 185,000 Americans were diagnosed with some form of brain
    cancer. A grade four brain tumor can grow from the size of a grape
    to tennis ball size in just 4 months. Brain tumors are almost always
    fatal and most people die within 6-12 months after diagnosis.

    On April 7, 2002, Sixty Minutes aired a fascinating report on brain
    cancer, explaining that scientists are unsure why incidence of the
    disease is growing so exponentially.

    Ironically, the segment was followed by a Sprint ad, which advised
    parents that the best way to keep track of teenagers is to connect
    them to a cell phone. While researchers say that radical damage to
    the brain can occur within the first few minutes of conversation,
    telecom ads encourage customers to spend many hours on the
    phone each month. Those blazing, full-page cell phone ads in
    newspapers and magazines must be the reason cell phone dangers
    are almost never discussed in the mainstream media.

    An excellent resource tool is Robert Kane's book Cellular
    Telephone Russian Roulette (Vantage Press, 2001). As a
    telecommunications expert, Kane presents an impressive
    collection of studies showing that both government agencies and
    cell phone manufacturers KNEW YEARS AGO that cell phone
    radiation at present exposure levels is dangerous to human health.
    He notes that cell phones would be rendered useless if their RF
    emissions were reduced to safe levels.

    Reports of illness from heavy cell phone usage and from living or
    working close to powerful RF transmitters are synchronous with
    numerous cancer-related lawsuits now being filed against the cell
    phone industry. The insurance industry sees big trouble ahead.
    Underwriters for Lloyd's of London refuse to insure phone
    manufacturers against damage to users' health. Cell phones are
    today what tobacco was 40 years ago.

    ===
    I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
    humans ("pure habitat"😉. Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
    years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

    Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

  15. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Quoted message said:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2488946,00.html

    As stated by SCIENTISTS based on RESEARCH rather than uninformed
    OPINION! How inconvenient....

    And, for the record, I don't own a mobile phone and probably never
    will.

    Mike Vandeman said:

    Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:40:33 PM
    Subject: Cell Phone Risks - You Don't Deserve Brain Cancer!

    Some people appear to have an almost pathological emotional
    attachment to their cell phones and there is a fascinating
    suggestion that cell radiation pulses might actually be addictive to
    the human brain. We can't save those who would rather die than
    switch. But ethics compelled us to ensure that all reasonable
    people have access to the basic scientific facts.

    Your cell phone is a microwave transmitter and it should bear a
    cancer warning, Microwave energy oscillates at millions to billions
    of cycles per second. The Journal of Cellular Biochemistry reports
    that these frequencies cause cancer and other diseases by
    interfering with cellular DNA and its repair mechanisms. Microwave
    promotes rapid cell aging. Italian scientists have recently
    demonstrated that cell phone radiation makes cancerous cells grow
    aggressively. Cordless phones marked 900 megahertz or 2.4
    gigahertz emits the same dangerous microwave radiation as cell
    phones.

    The connection between microwave exposure and cancer has been
    documented for years. During the Cold War, the Soviets irradiated
    the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, Russia, with low level, twin-beam
    microwave radiation. Two successive ambassadors developed
    leukemia. Other staffers also developed cancer, or their blood
    showed DNA damage, which precedes cancer.

    ---------------------------
    Balance yourself, find out more...
    http://www.phmiracleliving.com/innerlink.htm
    ---------------------------

    Research by University of Washington professor Dr. Henry Lai
    shows brain cells are clearly damaged by microwave levels far
    below the U.S. government's 'safety' guidelines. Dr. Lai notes that
    even tiny doses of radio frequency can cumulate over time and
    lead to harmful effects. He warns that public exposure to radiation
    from wireless transmitters 'should be limited to a minimum.'

    It seems Mikey hasn't kept up on the LATEST Research.... The Danish
    Paper, released yesterday tracked 450,000 CellPhone users, some more than
    20 years, and found "NO Correlation" between CellPhone use and Cancer,
    in general, and any specific Cancer in particular, after tracking these
    folks for at least 15 years.

    God, I like Good Science, over [censored] Junk Guesstimations.......

    Me who actually does own, a single Nokia Cellphone......

  16. Quoted message said:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2488946,00.html

    As stated by SCIENTISTS based on RESEARCH rather than uninformed
    OPINION! How inconvenient....

    I thought of posting that - it appeared in any number of newspapers,
    but really didn't want to revive an old discussion. The key point of
    the article was not that those doing the research were scientists, but
    that Demark has a comprehensive reporting system that provides data on
    the whole population of that country, allowing the researchers to
    obtain statistically significant results with no possibility of
    skewing the results due to somehow selecting an at-risk subset of the
    population (e.g., "Type-A" people under a lot of stress and who eat
    lots of unhealthy food at lavish business lunches, a class of people
    overrepresented among early cell-phone adopters due to the initial
    very high cost of the service).

    Quoted message said:
    Mike Vandeman said:

    Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:40:33 PM
    Subject: Cell Phone Risks - You Don't Deserve Brain Cancer!


    <snip>

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    A cell phone must greatly increase its field strength to maintain
    communications within the metallic cage of an auto. Thus, the effect
    of microwave radiation inside a vehicle is especially intense.
    Volkswagen of Europe has warned that cell phone usage inside a car
    can be 'injurious to health due to the extremely high electromagnetic
    fields generated.'

    The "extremely high electromagnetic fields" generated due to the use
    of a cell phone in an automobile occur when a distracted driver plows
    into some obstruction and the paramedics have to use a defibrillator
    to get a victim's ticker pumping again. :-)

    --
    My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

  17. Mike Vandeman wrote:
    <as usual nothing worth reading>>

    hey mikey take a look, cell phones DONT cause cancer. Is the rest of
    your research and facts as accurate? I really hope you did your research
    on your alleged phd better then you do research on the dribble you post
    here.

    http://www.wrcbtv.com/news/index.cfm?sid=4926

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=58298

  18. Electro magnetic energy poses a greater risk from cell phone towers
    radiating through peoples homes, and business

    "jason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Mike Vandeman wrote:
    <as usual nothing worth reading>>

    hey mikey take a look, cell phones DONT cause cancer. Is the rest of your
    research and facts as accurate? I really hope you did your research on
    your alleged phd better then you do research on the dribble you post here.

    http://www.wrcbtv.com/news/index.cfm?sid=4926

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=58298

  19. WTF does this have to do with cycling

    "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Electro magnetic energy poses a greater risk from cell phone towers
    radiating through peoples homes, and business

    "jason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Mike Vandeman wrote:
    <as usual nothing worth reading>>

    hey mikey take a look, cell phones DONT cause cancer. Is the rest of your
    research and facts as accurate? I really hope you did your research on
    your alleged phd better then you do research on the dribble you post
    here.

    http://www.wrcbtv.com/news/index.cfm?sid=4926

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=58298

  20. Quoted message said:

    WTF does this have to do with cycling

    About as much as any other of mikeys rantings and ravings do.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.