# DECT Phone Base causes CCD



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

the shielding only works when used on humans who read spin, not the studys them self
http://www.fosters.com/article/20070422/GJNEWS_01/104220119


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

To OP, I am about to publish a research paper that shows the ordinary reflective (tin) foil blanket would not suffice to shield anything above (and including) 3G radiation. I have patented a novel BTF (Bee Tin Foil) (TM) material and manufacturing technique that shields bee hives against possible radiation. Using my patented technology, you can talk unlimited on your cell phone while moving the bees around. I have 20% discount on orders of 1000 pieces or more.

If you order in next 1 day, we will double your order and include two HTF (Human Tin Foil) for two drivers at no extra charge.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

DaisyNJ said:


> To OP, I am about to publish a research paper that shows the ordinary reflective (tin) foil blanket would not suffice to shield anything above (and including) 3G radiation. I have patented a novel BTF (Bee Tin Foil) (TM) material and manufacturing technique that shields bee hives against possible radiation. Using my patented technology, you can talk unlimited on your cell phone while moving the bees around. I have 20% discount on orders of 1000 pieces or more.
> 
> If you order in next 1 day, we will double your order and include two HTF (Human Tin Foil) for two drivers at no extra charge.


is it made in the USA or china? I won't buy any new technologies unless manufactured here, thank you very much:applause:


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

wildbranch2007 said:


> is it made in the USA or china? I won't buy any new technologies unless manufactured here, thank you very much:applause:


Chinese Tin Foil hats are for Chinese Bees. For best efficacy, we manufacture and market Locally Adapted Tin Foil hats. so its all made right here in good 'ol USA.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

A solution at last. The bees of the world thank you DaisyNJ .


----------



## Hops Brewster (Jun 17, 2014)

Total hogwash. The same claim was laid upon High tension power transmission lines a few years ago.
Over 50% of homes in the US do not have landline telephone service. They are cellular only. Only a portion of those don't even have a cordless telephone, but plugged in phones. Cellular systems and residential cordless phones operate in different frequency bands and at different output power levels. 
To imply that the fact that some people have DECT phones in their homes or offices means that cell towers cause hive collapse is a ludicrous non sequitur. I have other uses for my foil.


----------



## D Coates (Jan 6, 2006)

The first post of Otterslide and it's about CCD and an article that was originally published in '07. Fast forward a decade No mention that a certified case of CCD hasn't been detected in almost 10 years. How have the bees not vanished without the reflective foil blankets since this article was first published?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Don't look now but according to the NASS since "CCD" was first reported, honey production colony numbers have increased from 2.4 to 2.8 million. The additional numbers being managed solely for pollination have undoubtedly increased as well as almond acreage has increased. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?documentID=1191


----------



## otterslide (May 9, 2017)

D Coates said:


> The first post of Otterslide and it's about CCD and an article that was originally published in '07. Fast forward a decade No mention that a certified case of CCD hasn't been detected in almost 10 years. How have the bees not vanished without the reflective foil blankets since this article was first published?


Not all bees travel across the country on trucks, and not all bees live very close to extremely strong EMF signals. I am certainly not saying EMFs are the single cause of CCD. 

I posted this study to give people who care about bees an idea of one of the many things that *could* cause bee to stop coming back to the hive. I also thought it's a nice study because it can be easily duplicated by anyone who has bees.

Discoveries are often made when people try things that seem impossible.

I don't know all the stats on CCD(if it has not happened in 10 years, that's wonderful), I am simply posting this as an idea, to anyone who cares enough to experiment or take a look at the issue presented.

The article is old because nobody is doing research in this field. There is far more research into the effects of EMF on rats than bees. At least half the studies coming out recently show that rats are being affected. I thought as beekeepers, somebody on this forum may be interested into this subject.


Wikipedia:
"In the six years leading up to 2013, more than 10 million beehives were lost, often to CCD, nearly twice the normal rate of loss.[9] "


----------



## D Coates (Jan 6, 2006)

So you're not even a beekeeper? You know nothing of CCD, the actual industry nor have any experience? Then you use an unsubstantiated Wikipedia quote to justify what, pushing your agenda?


----------



## otterslide (May 9, 2017)

jim lyon said:


> Don't look now but according to the NASS since "CCD" was first reported, honey production colony numbers have increased from 2.4 to 2.8 million. The additional numbers being managed solely for pollination have undoubtedly increased as well as almond acreage has increased. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?documentID=1191


The number of colonies may have gone up, because they are being replaced, but I think yearly losses are still high.
https://www.usda.gov/nass/PUBS/TODAYRPT/hcny0516.pdf

Losses:
Jan - March, 500,000
April-June , 352,860 lost.
July-September, 457,100 lost.
October-December, 412,380 lost.
That's 1.7 million lost for 2015.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

but those are not CCD losses
Loss not attributable to varroa or nosema loads made up less then 20%. That includes starvation etc 
BTW....space blankets have almost zero shielding effect, witch is part of what made your post so funny.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Yes, I've battled yearly losses my entire beekeeping life. Point is beekeepers have adapted and no crops have gone unpollinated since we first heard about the disappearing bees.


----------



## otterslide (May 9, 2017)

msl said:


> but those are not CCD losses
> Loss not attributable to varroa or nosema loads made up less then 20%. That includes starvation etc
> BTW....space blankets have almost zero shielding effect, witch is part of what made your post so funny.


You're right, space blankets are not good shielding. I have an EMF meter and have tested them only against very low RF fields. I just tested with higher strengths and they didn't shield well at all.
Aluminium foil works much better, to the point that wrapping your cell phone in it causes the phone not to ring any more when you call it.

I found this link that says says 31% CCD for 2013, and 60% for 2008.
https://www.epa.gov/pollinator-protection/colony-collapse-disorder

If it's below 20% in 2015, then it sounds like CCD is disappearing, so my post may have only had the effect of being a little funny to some ..

As a consumer I try to keep informed, and news about CCD has spread to so many documentaries and news, that it makes it sound like a big issue. 

Every time I heard about bees, I hear CCD. 
Even recent articles such as this one:
http://www.tctimes.com/be-nice-to-bees/article_e255502e-25db-11e7-a70f-8bc8e3e06cbf.html
Say Harvard thinks CCD is the greatest threat to bees.

"According to the Harvard Library, the greatest threat to bees in North America today is Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), the phenomenon where an entire hive of bees suddenly disappears without a trace."

It looks like maybe journalism has some catching up to do?


----------



## otterslide (May 9, 2017)

Hops Brewster said:


> Cellular systems and residential cordless phones operate in different frequency bands and at different output power levels.


DECT Bases operate at 1.9ghz.
The closest on a cell phone would be 1.8ghz. 
"As demand grew, carriers acquired licenses in the 1,800 MHz band."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_frequencies

Power levels at 2 meters from a DECT base are equivalent to 100-200meters from a cell tower. (Presentation by a certified EMF tester)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd1mi8gwU0w&t=1420s


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

I'd be more interested in direct evidence of RF effects on tissue, such as cell death triggered by RF as indicated by tryphan blue stain.

I've been told, but have not tried it myself, that cell phone frequencies will cause pinhole leaks in brain tissue, clearly seen by observing brain tissue under a microscope with tryphan blue present. The effects are frequency-dependent. The mechanisms involve causing specific molecules, usually in cell membranes, to vibrate. DECT frequency studies would not indicate a problem with cell tower frequencies. 

The problem with studies showing "CCD" caused by some effect like this is that the usual causes of hive problems are diseases carried by varroa mites and in some cases pesticide exposure, usually compounded by beekeeper stupidity. So placing a low-power RF device under a hive and then observing a problem with the hive does not, in itself, indicate cause and effect. I'd have to see a thorough and well-thought-out study, and then it must withstand well-reasoned challenges. I.e, science.


----------



## otterslide (May 9, 2017)

Phoebee said:


> I'd be more interested in direct evidence of RF effects on tissue, such as cell death triggered by RF as indicated by tryphan blue stain.
> 
> I've been told, but have not tried it myself, that cell phone frequencies will cause pinhole leaks in brain tissue, clearly seen by observing brain tissue under a microscope with tryphan blue present. The effects are frequency-dependent. The mechanisms involve causing specific molecules, usually in cell membranes, to vibrate. DECT frequency studies would not indicate a problem with cell tower frequencies.
> 
> The problem with studies showing "CCD" caused by some effect like this is that the usual causes of hive problems are diseases carried by varroa mites and in some cases pesticide exposure, usually compounded by beekeeper stupidity. So placing a low-power RF device under a hive and then observing a problem with the hive does not, in itself, indicate cause and effect. I'd have to see a thorough and well-thought-out study, and then it must withstand well-reasoned challenges. I.e, science.


I think you are talking about leaks in the blood-brain barrier. This has been observed in mouse experiments.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26723545
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19345073
"The present findings are in agreement with our earlier studies where we have seen increased BBB permeability immediately and 14 days after exposure."

There are photos of the dyed brains somewhere online as well, I just can't find them right now.

A lot of people have problems with DECT. Dr. Devra Davis talks about an experiment using mobile phones, not dect:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwyDCHf5iCY&t=2780
Having similar results.


----------



## D Coates (Jan 6, 2006)

otterslide said:


> It looks like maybe journalism has some catching up to do?


Ya think? CCD is a buzzword for the ill informed. You need to seriously reconsider your news sources if CCD comes up every time you hear about bees. Clearly it's the ignorant parroting bias and bad information to the unsuspecting. Coming into a beekeeping forum when you are not a beekeeper and making your first post about a CCD article from 2007 seems a bit odd. Reading and learning before posting half ****ed CCD articles is a more prudent plan of action.


----------



## bucksbees (May 19, 2015)

DaisyNJ said:


> Chinese Tin Foil hats are for Chinese Bees. For best efficacy, we manufacture and market Locally Adapted Tin Foil hats. so its all made right here in good 'ol USA.


Are the resources organically sourced, and glutton free?


----------



## Hops Brewster (Jun 17, 2014)

If I were to try to manage my bees based on all the latest (and older) *fad* "news" stories, I would go insane. I think my bees would lose their minds, too.

It smells like trolls in here.


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

bucksbees said:


> Are the resources organically sourced, and glutton free?


We use the best Tin Foil there is. Without giving out all the details, Tin is left in the open to adapt to local conditions and radiation levels. And no GMO in the manufacturing process either.


----------



## D Coates (Jan 6, 2006)

But, ...is it sustainable?


----------



## dudelt (Mar 18, 2013)

If the phone bases cause the bees to leave, if I put them in every room of my house would it make my adult kids leave? Just wishing, hoping and praying...


----------



## aunt betty (May 4, 2015)

jim lyon said:


> Don't look now but according to the NASS since "CCD" was first reported, honey production colony numbers have increased from 2.4 to 2.8 million. The additional numbers being managed solely for pollination have undoubtedly increased as well as almond acreage has increased. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?documentID=1191


Recall that 97% of statistics are made up bs.
United States Government NASS USDA statistics are 100% accurate? 
Somehow I doubt it.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

aunt betty said:


> Recall that 97% of statistics are made up bs.
> United States Government NASS USDA statistics are 100% accurate?
> Somehow I doubt it.


100% accurate? Ha ha, certainly not. A great number of beekeepers aren't even surveyed as this survey's purpose is to assess honey production and inventory and totally excludes beekeepers whose sole income is derived from pollination. But I do think it shows the general trend of hive numbers which is driven by economics more than anything else. My essential point is that honeybee populations arent proportionally declining with the advent of mobile phones.


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

jim lyon said:


> 100% accurate? Ha ha, certainly not. A great number of beekeepers aren't even surveyed as this survey's purpose is to assess honey production and inventory and totally excludes beekeepers whose sole income is derived from pollination. But I do think it shows the general trend of hive numbers which is driven by economics more than anything else. My essential point is that honeybee populations arent proportionally declining with the advent of mobile phones.


A valid point, but that statistic covers a broad range of gains versus losses. Mites and pesticides have not gone away. And now we've got people worried sick over Zika mosquitoes ... pesticide application companies are leaving leaflets on our door every week wanting to kill all our pesky bugs.

Do we still believe that feral honey bee populations are either non-viable or rarely so? Bees can only increase in population with the help of beekeepers? I'd propose that we've shifted our activities to a lot of splits, to make up for losses of all sorts.

I do not wear a tinfoil hat. (Don't know where I'd find it, or why aluminum would not work as well, but ... ) I do believe it is possible to do biological damage with radio waves. I believe that based on physics. I don't believe it is a major problem in most cases, or we'd have more glaring evidence, but I would not be surprised if accumulating evidence did show that holding a 3-watt cell phone to your head is unhealthy. A few mW from a wireless handset with a 30-meter range, not so much. And this thread concentrates on the 1.9 GHz band. That's one of four bands used for cordless handsets, and is not used much in the US. If there is a biological effect, it is strongly frequency-dependent.


----------



## Richard Cryberg (May 24, 2013)

Phoebee said:


> I do believe it is possible to do biological damage with radio waves. I believe that based on physics.


What does physics teach us? Well, for photons at UV or shorter wavelengths physics tells us those photons have enough energy to break chemical bonds. Photons in the visible spectra have enough energy to break very weak chemical bonds. Photons in the radio wavelengths have enough energy to excite molecular vibrational modes if the photon has the same energy as the vibrational mode, but no place close to enough energy to break any chemical bonds. Molecular vibrations are what we often call heat. This is how a microwave oven heats water. So, if 3 watts of heat next to your head is dangerous then a cell phone putting out three watts could also be dangerous if it happened to be closely tuned to the vibrational mode of some chemical in your head. As normal metabolism in your brain puts out about 20 watts I do not think an added three watts is much to worry about even if you spend two or three hours a day on the phone. Getting in a car or shower is a few million times more dangerous.


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

Its the vibrational modes. Exciting particular molecules, particularly within cell membranes, into strong vibration can cause the membrane to leak. Cell membranes are typically bilayers, in between which are highly polarized lipids. Just the thing to grab onto with RF and shake.

This is poorly studied. And studies on mice would mean nothing for bees or humans. Different molecules, which respond to different frequencies.

There's a lot of horse-hockey out there regarding Rife Frequencies. I'll start with the notion that they can heal. Mostly they harm, and can only heal if, for example, they harm a parasite instead of the host. But underneath all the scams and hocus-pocus, there are real phenomena at work.


----------

