Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 38854
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

2005/7/27-28 [Consumer/Camera] UID:38854 Activity:nil
7/27    Cellphones could lead to eye problems:
        http://www.isracast.com/tech_news/250705_tech.htm
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2009/8/31-9/9 [Consumer/Camera] UID:53311 Activity:nil
8/31    Does it make sense to buy a nice 70-200mm f/4L lens and mount it on a
        cheap Canon Rebel XSi with 12MP? I'd hate to upgrade the body
        because bodies get outdated quickly, and I don't care about how fast
        auto-focus is. I just care about image quality for non-sports pics. I'd
        love to have a sharper lens than my cheapo 55-250mm and don't care
        about the body, but I'm wondering if there are severe disadvantages
	...
2009/8/28-9/9 [Consumer/Camera] UID:53307 Activity:low
8/27    http://www.flickr.com/photos/acornsarebitter
        On a scale of 1-10 (10=best), how good is this flickr
        stream? How interesting is it. Be honest please. Please
        post your comments directly on flickr if possible.
        \_ while we're at it, can someone critique this one please?
           http://www.flickr.com/photos/polvero/sets/72157611811908959
	...
2009/7/21-24 [Consumer/Camera] UID:53172 Activity:moderate
7/21    NASA uses Nikon cameras. NASA prefers Nikon cameras. There are more
        Nikon cameras that went to outer space than any other brand. I love
        Nikon cameras. They're built to be abused, built to last.
        \_ When is Apple going to make cameras or partner with a good one?
        \_ Canon cameras are just as good, and I think in the US Canon is more
           popular than Nikon.  -- yuen, owner 3 Nikon SLRs and 0 Canon.
	...
2009/5/28-6/5 [Consumer/Camera] UID:53053 Activity:nil
5/28    Reading camera posts got me curious about rangefinder cameras. In an
        era of DSLR, full automation, and instant digital imaging, why would
        anyone want to use a rangefinder camera? Why are Voitglander and
        Leica even making modern rangefinders when DSLRs are clearly superior
        in terms of lens selection and features?                -DSLR guy
        \_ Rangefinders are still more quiet, have less vibration, and are
	...
2009/5/28-6/4 [Consumer/Camera] UID:53052 Activity:nil
5/28    Hey kngharv, you said "it's *IMPOSSIBLE* to make a good 6x zoom."
        http://csua.com/2002/06/16/#25111
        But Nikon and Canon came out with a 11X zoom. The 18-200mm.
        Ironic how times have changed eh?
        \_ You haven't justified that they are "good", only that they exist.
        \_ Tamron also has a 28-300mm.  Don't know if it's good though.
	...
2009/5/4-6 [Consumer/Camera] UID:52944 Activity:high
5/4     Which Canon dSLR should I buy?
        \_ The cheapest one you can get away with, and the most expensive
           glass you can afford. Camera body depreciates 1/2 every 18-24
           months. Plastic kit lenses depreciate at about 15-20% each
           year till they're worthless in about 3-5 years. Good glass
           (constant f/2.8 and below) hardly ever depreciate, and some
	...
2009/2/23-25 [Consumer/Camera] UID:52620 Activity:nil
2/22    Can't believe this didn't get posted:
        http://nyulocal.com/on-campus/2009/02/19/flashy-protesting
        \_ I agree with the protestors. Adobe Flash Player's monopoly
           on personal computers must be stopped. We seriously don't
           want the next Microsoft, in the form of a Flash Player.
        \_ NSFW
	...
2009/1/7-12 [Consumer/Camera] UID:52336 Activity:low
1/7     Anyone have a rangefinder camera? Like it?
        \_ LESS CAMERA BULLSHIT, MORE BOOBIES.  OK TNX BYE
           \_ here you go: http://www.anonib.com/_teensnorules/index.php?t=2673
           \_ What is the deal with geeks and cameras, anyway?
        \_ There was a time when people were interested in rangefinder
           camera because without the pentaprism, it's lighter than SLR....
	...
Cache (7005 bytes)
www.isracast.com/tech_news/250705_tech.htm
ISRAELI RESEARCH: CELL PHONE RADIATION MAY CAUSE VISUAL DAMAGE In a recent scientific study conducted by a team of researchers from the Technion, a possible link between microwave radiation, similar to the ty pe found in cellular phones, and different kinds of damage to the visual system was found. At least one kind of damage seems to accumulate over time and not heal, challenging the common view and leading the researche rs to the assertion that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation. The researchers also emphasized t hat existing exposure guidelines for microwave radiation might have to c hange. Microscope photographs of lenses incubated in organ culture conditions fo r 12 days. The effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation have long been a sub ject for debate among scientists. The technological developments of the last twenty years such as cell and cordless phones, wireless communicati ons, monitors and even high voltage lines have all been studied as poten tial risk factors for cancer and other diseases. Less known to the publi c, but still a matter of some extensive research, is the study of the ef fect of microwave radiation on the visual system and especially on the l ens of the eye. The basic motivation for this research came after World War II when it was suspected that radar operators suffered a greater ris k of developing cataracts (a condition characterized by clouding in the natural lens of the eye). Although these particular suspicions were even tually shown to be debatable, they were the trigger for the first guidel ines for exposure to electromagnetic radiation. Moreover, the eye as our natural radiation detector is the obvious choice for investigating the effects of electromagnetic radiation upon the human body. The electromagnetic system exposing four eye lenses to electromagnetic ra diation Each vessel containing a lens, inserted between the two plates o f the transmission line. The entire system is placed in an incubator mai ntaining constant temperature for the duration of exposure. In more recent studies on animals the effects of microwave radiation as a risk factor for cataracts have been established and have helped determi ne the guidelines put forth by the International Commission on Non-Ioniz ing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in 1998. A common measure for microwav e radiation is the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) which is the average p ower density absorbed in a given volume per average weight density (Watt /Kg). This is the standard used by cell phone companies, among others, t o measure levels of radiation. When microwave energy impinges upon body tissue, part of it is absorbed and converted to heat due to ionic conduc tion. This heat manifests itself as a temperature increase inside the ti ssue. Past studies in animals have shown that even a slight increase in temperature close to the lens (as low as 3 degrees Celsius) can increase the risk of developing a cataract. With a low enough SAR the local temp erature in the lens might never increase to that level. A less common me asure is called Specific Energy Absorption (SA), and is defined as the e nergy density absorbed in the tissue divided by its weight density. Whil e SAR is the measure of the rate microwave radiation is absorbed by a ti ssue, SA is the measure of the total energy absorbed. This difference pl ayed a significant role in a recently published study on the effects of microwave radiation on the visual system. In the study conducted by researchers in the Rappaport Faculty of Medicin e at the Technion, and published in the journal Bioelectromagnetics, a n ew link has been found between microwave radiation and the development o f cataracts. Eye lenses of one-year-old male calves obtained from a slau ghterhouse were exposed to microwave radiation - one eye from each pair used for control. Both con trol and exposed lens were kept in an incubator at a constant temperatur e During this period each exposed lens had experienced up to 2mW of 11 GHz radiation virtually around the clock, and each hour it was exposed f or a 50 minute session followed by a 10 minute break. During one of thes e breaks, every 24 hours, it was tested optically and compared to the co ntrol lens. During the short (5 minutes) optical test, the lens was not exposed to radiation, but when exposed, its average temperature was main tained constant in an incubator. Good quality lens as demonstrated by the optical scanner. All rays passin g Through the lens have similar focal length. The thick dashed line conn ects the points of the back vertex Distance for each ray passing through the lens. Exposed lens, showing considerable variability in the focal length of the beams passing through the lens. The experiment yielded a number of interesting results: 1 Exposing the lens for a prolonged time to microwave radiation (in the frequency and intensity described above) caused macroscopic damage affec ting the optical quality of the lens. This damage increased as the exper iment and irradiation continued and reached a maximum level after a numb er of days. When the exposure stopped the optical damage began to heal g radually. Interestingly enough, a similar maximum level was observed whe n the irradiation intensity was reduced to one-half the original, except that it took twice the time. Tiny "bu bbles" were created on the surface of the lens. The bubbles were formed by irradiation with microwave and were not the result of a heat created throughout the lens. The researchers have speculated that the mechanism responsible for the creation of the bubbles is microscopic friction betw een particular cells exposed to electromagnetic radiation. Contrary to t he macroscopic damage, the microscopic damage did not show any signs of healing and continued to accumulate during the course of the experiment. Professor Levi Schchter Although the researchers are cautious about interpreting the results of t he experiment and its possible implications to public health, it seems t hat prolonged exposure to microwave radiation similar to that used by ce llular phones can lead to both macroscopic and microscopic damage to the lens and that at least part of this damage seems to accumulate over tim e and does not seem to heal. Professor Levi Schchter, who worked on the research, told IsraCast that attention should be paid not only to the S pecific Absorption Rate (SAR) but also to the total energy absorbed by t he tissue (SA), which is not currently under supervision by the appropri ate regulative authorities. Implying that the duration of exposure is no t less important than the intensity of the irradiation. For comments about this article, contact Iddo Genuth & Tomer Yaffe Editor: Tomer Yaffe | Word proofing & Editing by Talia Adar | Graphic Edi tor: Yael Yaffe 2005 IsraCast Jerusalem. Any reproduction or use of the materials on this website without express written permission of IsraCast is prohibited.