Wireless safety?

**BoristheBiter** · 10th February 2014, 06:59

Originally Posted by Ocean1

Aye. Some get a bit precious about what most experts consider very minor risks. But we're living a lot longer, more chance for any cumulative badshit to catch up with us.

Speaking of which, I was reading a bit the other day about the old Beatles song that went "when I'm sixty four". The claim was that when the song was released that was pretty close to the average life expectancy. It's over a decade longer now.

Fuck life's good.

Unless you are in the growing statistics of the middle aged people that are living healthily getting diagnosed with all forms of cancer.

Just puts more weight to the "grains are bad for us" groups.

**KiwiGeek** · 18th February 2014, 18:13

Just joined the forum recently so jumping in feet first.

There has been no causative link found between wireless and cancer in human, old or young. The most recently released study, http://sparkonit.com/2014/02/13/a-lo...-cause-cancer/, is yet another nail in the coffin of the wireless/cancer crap.

As for aluminium and Alzheimers, while early studies suggested it, further investigation showed that thee is no link. http://www.alzheimers.org.uk/site/sc...documentID=102

Unfortunately there are people that go off half cocked or are deliberatly misleading, such as that vaccine/autism thing, where it turned out the doctor doing the "study" had registered a patent appliucation for a rival vaccine before he did the "study". Not only that, he falsified data or left out lots of rather awkward data that refuted his claims. The conspiracy chuckleheads then extended it to all vaccines.

**Smifffy** · 23rd February 2014, 12:53

Originally Posted by Ocean1

Aye. Some get a bit precious about what most experts consider very minor risks. But we're living a lot longer, more chance for any cumulative badshit to catch up with us.

Speaking of which, I was reading a bit the other day about the old Beatles song that went "when I'm sixty four". The claim was that when the song was released that was pretty close to the average life expectancy. It's over a decade longer now.

Fuck life's good.

'64 was released in 1967. Average life expectancy from birth for a UK male in 1967 was 75.3. In 2011 it was 82.7.

Lennon has been quoted as saying the song was written in "the cavern days" so perhaps 61-63 would be more representative. In which case 74 would be a good average.

**Ocean1** · 23rd February 2014, 18:18

Originally Posted by Smifffy

'64 was released in 1967. Average life expectancy from birth for a UK male in 1967 was 75.3. In 2011 it was 82.7.

Lennon has been quoted as saying the song was written in "the cavern days" so perhaps 61-63 would be more representative. In which case 74 would be a good average.

Thought it sounded a bit low. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/mortal...life-span.html

The extra 10 years is good though.

Having looked, I was surprised at the disparity of data over the few references I checked, varied by 5 years or so.

Another recent read, (well alright, a couple of years ago): The current English generation is the first for several centuries to have a lower life expectancy than their parents.