Using RF for fighting Obesity

[VOguy]

I found this interesting tid-bit on the FCC's legal journal, "The Daily Digest". I think this merits watching. This may be a new technology that will help people.

Several hospitals in Minnesota have applied for an experimental license to transmit a frequency of 6.78 MHz into the body to react with the vagus nerve.

The inferior ganglion of vagus nerve is a large sensory ganglion of the vagus, anterior to the internal jugular vein and just inferior to the nerve exit from the jugular foramen.

The unipolar cell bodies in this ganglion convey taste from the buds on the root of the tongue and general sensation from the throat and gut to about the level of the splenic flexure of the colon.

Thought is that using this technology will crush some of the urges and lessen the need for impulse eating. The method in which this is administered is like diathermy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diathermy) that heat tissues by ultrasound for the purpose of therapeutic deep heating.

Tests will be conducted at various hospitals in Minnesota including Mayo Clinic, Unity Hospital and Univ. of Minnesota Hospital.

Remember, you heard it here first!

FCC Doc: 2nd Item on Page (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277032A1.pdf)

[Project]

well, I am totally immersed in 2.4-5.8 ghz radio waves... and I am overweight :) - guess I need to boost my routers up to 6+ghz

[Dera]

http://smiles2k.net/smiles/big_smiles/super_smilies007.gif I may be a little oversensitive in this area, but I wish we would call it "obese" without any reference to "beasts", be they skinny or fat. http://smiles2k.net/smiles/big_smiles/super_smilies007.gif

[Project]

lol :) O-beast-ity

[VOguy]

The microwave stuff, 2.4-5.8 ghz, usually affects the eyes. So if you start needing thick lens, you'll know why. My mom always told me it was because of other things, but ...

Seriously, I can see how it would work, but the side effect is that all foods would taste bland and not have the sensory sweet, salt, sour reaction. So it basically takes away only the craving for the taste and not the hunger. Still, interesting technology.

[lastconundrum]

The microwave stuff, 2.4-5.8 ghz, usually affects the eyes. So if you start needing thick lens, you'll know why. My mom always told me it was because of other things, but ...

Seriously, I can see how it would work, but the side effect is that all foods would taste bland and not have the sensory sweet, salt, sour reaction. So it basically takes away only the craving for the taste and not the hunger. Still, interesting technology.

Is it reversible? I'd hate to go through life without being able to enjoy the taste of food.

[Dera]

Is it reversible? I'd hate to go through life without being able to enjoy the taste of food.

:biglaugh: Excellent question!

[VOguy]

That is a good question. We'll have to see what the studies show.

I'm guessing, but I would think that the treatments would wear off.

On the eye damage, unfortunately that is permanent. The broadcast side warns of this, however it's poo-pooed by most since it's wrongly linked to the cellphone medical research. Cellphones are in the upper 850 to 900 mHz, and the new Nextel stuff is 1.9 gHz roughly.

It comes down to wattage/exposure x time x proximity to source.

[VOguy]

This was in this morning's CGC Communicator Magazine. Interesting reads if you're concerned about the effects of RF


ALLEGED HIDDEN DANGERS OF RFR

We have a federal human exposure to RF radiation (RFR) standard, but is it adequate? "The Hidden Dangers of Cell Phone Radiation" story in the August 2007 Life Extension magazine is intriguing because of its behind-the-scenes look at cell phone RFR politics, and a possible mechanism (other than thermal
heating) that links RFR to human disease.

It appears, based on the article, that steady-state (continuous) RF at 1.9 GHz is not as much of a disease causing concern as the type of amplitude modulation that is imposed on the carrier (e.g. the pulsing nature of TDMA and GSM signals and rapid amplitude adjustments that are made to CDMA signals).

http://tinyurl.com/2prknx (Life Extension story)
http://www.safewireless.org/ (Related Website)

[Alpha]

Is it reversible? I'd hate to go through life without being able to enjoy the taste of food.

No kidding last....taste is one of life's pleasures...;)

[VOguy]

And the others?

I'm waiting to see how diplomatic you'll be. :lmao:

[lastconundrum]

This was in this morning's CGC Communicator Magazine. Interesting reads if you're concerned about the effects of RF


ALLEGED HIDDEN DANGERS OF RFR

We have a federal human exposure to RF radiation (RFR) standard, but is it adequate? "The Hidden Dangers of Cell Phone Radiation" story in the August 2007 Life Extension magazine is intriguing because of its behind-the-scenes look at cell phone RFR politics, and a possible mechanism (other than thermal
heating) that links RFR to human disease.

It appears, based on the article, that steady-state (continuous) RF at 1.9 GHz is not as much of a disease causing concern as the type of amplitude modulation that is imposed on the carrier (e.g. the pulsing nature of TDMA and GSM signals and rapid amplitude adjustments that are made to CDMA signals).

http://tinyurl.com/2prknx (Life Extension story)
http://www.safewireless.org/ (Related Website)
What happens to folks living on the top floor of a building with a cluster of cell phone antennas on the roof?

[VOguy]

I can sum it up this way, "Danger, Will Robinson!"

Seriously, exposure to Cellphone RF towers for prolonged time is not healthy. Most Cellphone stuff is in the same range as a microwave oven, so you can make your own conclusions on prolonged exposure.

I've turned down rooms in hotels where I can look out the window and see a cell antenna within .25 mile pointing at me.