California City Blocks 5G Over Cancer Concerns

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
28,921
oh, I thought plastic straws were being banned because we were dumping too much of it into the ocean?

There really isn't anything wrong with the replacement wax paper straws, btw.
Ironic that those straws are packaged in plastic wrappers.
Pay, weather, concerts, schools. I could do a comparison of pay scales between my coworkers around the country compared to mine-- we make more money here.

I just wouldn't live in some parts of California.

Also remember this comment when you have to live in snow. Fuck that noise.
Sure, but how much of that money do you get to keep? What proportion of your net income is living expenses?
 

pek

prairie dog
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
1,823
Electromagnetic radiation can hurt beasts and peoples. Funniest thing I've ever seen is watching a seagull (rats with wings) cook when it flew through a Navy air search radar beam. At Great Lakes where the school is, they have power limiters on the training radar, but because it's normal fleet use, sometimes they take the limiter out of the circuit, and you can see florescent tubes light up around North Chicago. And set off flash bulbs (yes, I'm old) if they're near enough.

But the 5g stuff? Probably not.
 

zkostik

Gawd
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
929
The problem is the 5G has to operate at a higher freq to get the speed they want. The higher the frequency the shorter the wave will go. 5G will travel about 750 feet to just under a mile depending on the version. That isn't very far. So like I said in my above post they have to plaster a grid with them to get full coverage. Was just at an event a few weeks ago where they were showing current coverage deployments, then expanded it out to show 5G and it was crazy how many towers they had to have.

Yeah, for us they mentioned even less than 750 feet, I think it was like under 500 even but antenna size is way smaller than conventional ones. I guess the intent is to install that shit all over the place...quite literally. I mean we are already well within signal overlap of big towers, do the small ones really have any adverse health effect or it's the usual that nobody really knows for sure and people are simply scared of big words that folks that know nothing about RF throw around?
 

Sikkyu

I Question Reality
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
2,878
Pay, weather, concerts, schools. I could do a comparison of pay scales between my coworkers around the country compared to mine-- we make more money here.

I just wouldn't live in some parts of California.

Also remember this comment when you have to live in snow. Fuck that noise.

I'll take snow over shit in the streets any day
 

Exavior

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
9,700
Yeah, for us they mentioned even less than 750 feet, I think it was like under 500 even but antenna size is way smaller than conventional ones. I guess the intent is to install that shit all over the place...quite literally. I mean we are already well within signal overlap of big towers, do the small ones really have any adverse health effect or it's the usual that nobody really knows for sure and people are simply scared of big words that folks that know nothing about RF throw around?

Yeah, I could see them having to reduce that. It is probably something along the lines of around 750 in rural areas, 500 in urban since you then have to worry about all the buildings in the way along with building materials cutting signal.
 

BloodyIron

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
3,439
I'll believe it when they produce a scientific study, performed by independent bodies, that is peer reviewed, and clearly shows a reproducible, tangible, negative impact to health.

Otherwise, if they're not willing to do the work it takes to prove something is safe, or dangerous, than they're just acting out of ignorance and fear. Might as well rename themselves "Salem" and be done with it.
 

DNMock

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
399
Actually, that doesn't sound like a California issue. Lowes selling a 2 by 4 that is actually 1.5X3.5 is pretty crappy.

That's actually the standardized dimensions of a 2 x 4. I don't know when it came to be, but go to any lumber yard, Lowes, Home Depot, etc. etc.

The lengths are wonky too. Like an 8 ft board is actually 7' and 8 5/8" in length.

Believe it or not, this is done on purpose as the finished product when framing a building ends up being correct in dimensions. As in you buy 8 foot 2 x 4's to build a 4" thick wall that's 8 ft. tall when you finish it out.
 

Paladin21

Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
529
That's actually the standardized dimensions of a 2 x 4. I don't know when it came to be, but go to any lumber yard, Lowes, Home Depot, etc. etc.

The lengths are wonky too. Like an 8 ft board is actually 7' and 8 5/8" in length.

Believe it or not, this is done on purpose as the finished product when framing a building ends up being correct in dimensions. As in you buy 8 foot 2 x 4's to build a 4" thick wall that's 8 ft. tall when you finish it out.

Yeah, it's due to the way pretty much all houses are built to spec off of some pre-fab plans that the builders are using. They're laid out on grids, so the measurements are always "standard" to make it easier on the architects. Then, the materials vendors assume that you're sticking 1/4" sheetrock on both sides of the stud (or sheetrock on one side and siding on the other) to create a whole wall that is a standard 4". Same thing for lengths, for framing studs you need a header and footer, that should even it out to a standard length.

That said, if you're doing it any other way, it sucks. And it's still deceptive as hell if you don't actually work with stuff like that very often. My house was built in the 1870s, working on it is super-fun with having to figure out how to use "modern" dimensional materials to match up with the original work. I do a lot of re-engineering (which is almost certainly too dignified a term for what I actually do, lol) and custom work on it.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
That's actually the standardized dimensions of a 2 x 4. I don't know when it came to be, but go to any lumber yard, Lowes, Home Depot, etc. etc.

The lengths are wonky too. Like an 8 ft board is actually 7' and 8 5/8" in length.

Believe it or not, this is done on purpose as the finished product when framing a building ends up being correct in dimensions. As in you buy 8 foot 2 x 4's to build a 4" thick wall that's 8 ft. tall when you finish it out.


This man is correct. It's all about being able to build to proper dimensions while eliminating waste.
 

DNMock

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
399
Yeah, it's due to the way pretty much all houses are built to spec off of some pre-fab plans that the builders are using. They're laid out on grids, so the measurements are always "standard" to make it easier on the architects. Then, the materials vendors assume that you're sticking 1/4" sheetrock on both sides of the stud (or sheetrock on one side and siding on the other) to create a whole wall that is a standard 4". Same thing for lengths, for framing studs you need a header and footer, that should even it out to a standard length.

That said, if you're doing it any other way, it sucks. And it's still deceptive as hell if you don't actually work with stuff like that very often. My house was built in the 1870s, working on it is super-fun with having to figure out how to use "modern" dimensional materials to match up with the original work. I do a lot of re-engineering (which is almost certainly too dignified a term for what I actually do, lol) and custom work on it.

So you spend a lot of time making spacers and shims
 

Paladin21

Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
529
Spacers/shims are common, or on a wall you can stagger the studs to get it to work out, but it's also common to have to cut things down too. Since the house is so old, nothing is built to current common sizes. Sometimes you can either space or trim into it, sometimes I end up ripping things out and redoing them. Other times I just special order pieces to make it work, as the work-around would be too involved for the amount of time I have to work on it. For example, when we re-did the dining room, I had custom mini-blinds made as none of the store sizes were anywhere close and I wasn't ripping out and re-framing windows to put in new blinds.
 

jardows

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
2,092
Yeah, for us they mentioned even less than 750 feet, I think it was like under 500 even but antenna size is way smaller than conventional ones.
Here's what I find sad about this - those 5G ap's will have to connect to the main network some how - probably via connected fiber lines. But you still won't be able to get FTTH in those areas.
 

NoOther

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
6,468
With the way 5G works, it would seem less likely to cause cancer than some of the other RF methods.

Yeah, pretty much.

To everyone else: Mill Valley and Marin County is basically a suburb of San Francisco across the Golden Gate Bridge. Much of it is very wealthy and full of people who basically have the privilege to be dumbasses. Please don't lump the rest of California--hell, don't lump San Francisco--in with these people.

Tell you what, as soon as California stops doing stupid shit, we won't lump you in on these other stories in parts of California as well...

The problem is that these fringe parts of California seem to get their ideas onto the state ballot and then they get passed. So that means the majority of the state is responsible for passing stupid shit and electing stupid idiots to congress. Remember, you guys keep voting Pelosi into office and she can barely form complete sentences anymore...
 

Vader1975

Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
820
That's actually the standardized dimensions of a 2 x 4. I don't know when it came to be, but go to any lumber yard, Lowes, Home Depot, etc. etc.

The lengths are wonky too. Like an 8 ft board is actually 7' and 8 5/8" in length.

Believe it or not, this is done on purpose as the finished product when framing a building ends up being correct in dimensions. As in you buy 8 foot 2 x 4's to build a 4" thick wall that's 8 ft. tall when you finish it out.
If its industry standards stuff then I suppose its fine. But I can still get the idea that if you are buying something that is marked as being X long and X wide and it isn't that would go down against our false advertising. So listing its actual size is probably wise anyway?
 

SomeoneElse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
1,940
I bought a bag of sand for a sandbox years ago. Bag had a label that the sand was known to cause cancer in the state of California. At this point the answer to your question is none and they don't need it to make their statement.
I will piggy back on that and say that I bought a the blue chalk block used on billiard queues and they are labeled with the same statement.....
 

Draax

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
5,213
Actually, that doesn't sound like a California issue. Lowes selling a 2 by 4 that is actually 1.5X3.5 is pretty crappy.
LOL wut? That is how all wood is sold. When timber is cut it is cut to 2"x4". It is then dried and 1/4" is planned off either side to make it straight and flat.
 
D

Deleted member 184142

Guest
I love how this has gone from 5G to wood.

The problem with Cali and all of their "cancer" causes are that when you label EVERYTHING like that, it loses all effect, and people ignore it. Rather than looking at exposure and consumption rates and labeling the serious offenders, instead labeling something you would have to inhale or consume enough to cause acute problems or even kill you before ever getting cancer.
 

Bowman15

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2015
Messages
1,767
With the way 5G works, it would seem less likely to cause cancer than some of the other RF methods.



Tell you what, as soon as California stops doing stupid shit, we won't lump you in on these other stories in parts of California as well...

The problem is that these fringe parts of California seem to get their ideas onto the state ballot and then they get passed. So that means the majority of the state is responsible for passing stupid shit and electing stupid idiots to congress. Remember, you guys keep voting Pelosi into office and she can barely form complete sentences anymore...

Thank you for replying with some common sense.
 

MrValentine

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
1,631
The problem is that these fringe parts of California seem to get their ideas onto the state ballot and then they get passed. So that means the majority of the state is responsible for passing stupid shit and electing stupid idiots to congress

Quoted because it needs to be said again. and again. and again....
 

1_rick

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
2,055
If its industry standards stuff then I suppose its fine.

Googling this stuff yesterday I ran across an article (I think it was a Straight Dope story from like 2007) saying the Federal government set this "1/2 inch smaller than nominal" dimension decades ago. If that's true (and I have no reason to disbelieve it) then Lowe's should've appealed that court case as far as it took, instead of settling (and also, someone should probably sue California.)
 

1_rick

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
2,055
Quoted because it needs to be said again. and again. and again....

The problem is that the nutty part of California has enough people to outvote the rest of them.

A parallel could be drawn to the Electoral College if someone wanted to.
 

NoOther

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
6,468
If its industry standards stuff then I suppose its fine. But I can still get the idea that if you are buying something that is marked as being X long and X wide and it isn't that would go down against our false advertising. So listing its actual size is probably wise anyway?

No, because the industry standard 2"x4" is 1 1/2" x 3 1/2". If you then listed it as 1 1/2" x 3 1/2" one would wonder if it was a standard 2x4. It isn't just 2x4s, its all lumber sizes in the US for building. There are a number of places that will put the actual dimension as a note on the product though.

Googling this stuff yesterday I ran across an article (I think it was a Straight Dope story from like 2007) saying the Federal government set this "1/2 inch smaller than nominal" dimension decades ago. If that's true (and I have no reason to disbelieve it) then Lowe's should've appealed that court case as far as it took, instead of settling (and also, someone should probably sue California.)

The reason they didn't fight it is because California is stupid and put together an organization that enforces extra language and information for those that are stupid and can't look up well known standards. Also it would cost far more to actually fight the lawsuit in light of how incredibly asinine California is.
 

1_rick

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
2,055
The reason they didn't fight it is because California is stupid and put together an organization that enforces extra language and information for those that are stupid and can't look up well known standards. Also it would cost far more to actually fight the lawsuit in light of how incredibly asinine California is.

Based on the amount they paid, you're right, but it's annoying.

Someone bigger than Randy Barrett needs to sit up and say "You know what, California? Fuck you. We're not selling stuff to you any more."

Let's see how CA gets by with no lumber (or, say, no Fords).
 

OutOfPhase

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
4,308
Based on the amount they paid, you're right, but it's annoying.

Someone bigger than Randy Barrett needs to sit up and say "You know what, California? Fuck you. We're not selling stuff to you any more."

Let's see how CA gets by with no lumber (or, say, no Fords).

Yes, because if there is one thing for which businesses are desperately seeking, it's a way to not sell anything into the world's fifth largest economy. And I'm sure nothing you use or enjoy could come from CA companies.
 

1_rick

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
2,055
Yes, because if there is one thing for which businesses are desperately seeking, it's a way to not sell anything into the world's fifth largest economy. And I'm sure nothing you use or enjoy could come from CA companies.

Way to miss the point.

California uses its size to force the rest of the country to do things its way. Even, apparently, to penalize companies for following Federal standards. They should be taken down a peg for that. Why, everyone's complaining in onther thread right now about Microsoft being heavy-handed. At least Microsoft's not forcing you to pay them money when you install Chrome.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,443
I love how this has gone from 5G to wood.

The problem with Cali and all of their "cancer" causes are that when you label EVERYTHING like that, it loses all effect, and people ignore it. Rather than looking at exposure and consumption rates and labeling the serious offenders, instead labeling something you would have to inhale or consume enough to cause acute problems or even kill you before ever getting cancer.
"Everything" is not labeled like that. Given the ridiculous examples in this thread, it's obvious that *anything* labeled is causing some members here to shit their panties.

Wood dust: known irritant and carcinogen for a good few hundred years now :\
But fuck those Californians, keep huffing it up...

Silica dust/asbestos: guy probably poured that sand onto the ground while inhaling huge dust clouds...with a smug look on his face the whole time about who "stupid" Californians are for needing that warning

Coffee: acrylamide used in processing; successfully sued the potato chip industry to have that chemical eradicated from *their* processing after years of court battles and scientific evidence of its harmful impacts...but you'd rather trust Lays and Starbucks to give a flying fuck about your health?

Did the guy whining about his pool chalk bother to look up what's actually in there? The label sure ticked him off...not enough to trigger giving a shit about his health. Who knows, probably ground it up and snorted some and rubbed it all over his eyes and balls just to spite "KaliFornia" or whateverthefuck goes on for logic in some of these people's minds.

It's not like these are banned so what's with all the pearl clutching? 900 specific chemicals known by the scientific community to cause harm to humans...and our state does the courtesy of letting people know what the corporations are putting in their products to sell you without letting you know if there's anything dangerous in there...kinda like ingredients in food, or banning lead paint, you know shit that California did and does that gets people all riled up until their kid ends up with cancer from the local water after decades of the local mill dumping theydontevenknow into the streams.
 
D

Deleted member 184142

Guest
"Everything" is not labeled like that. Given the ridiculous examples in this thread, it's obvious that *anything* labeled is causing some members here to shit their panties.

Wood dust: known irritant and carcinogen for a good few hundred years now :\
But fuck those Californians, keep huffing it up...

Silica dust/asbestos: guy probably poured that sand onto the ground while inhaling huge dust clouds...with a smug look on his face the whole time about who "stupid" Californians are for needing that warning

Coffee: acrylamide used in processing; successfully sued the potato chip industry to have that chemical eradicated from *their* processing after years of court battles and scientific evidence of its harmful impacts...but you'd rather trust Lays and Starbucks to give a flying fuck about your health?

Did the guy whining about his pool chalk bother to look up what's actually in there? The label sure ticked him off...not enough to trigger giving a shit about his health. Who knows, probably ground it up and snorted some and rubbed it all over his eyes and balls just to spite "KaliFornia" or whateverthefuck goes on for logic in some of these people's minds.

It's not like these are banned so what's with all the pearl clutching? 900 specific chemicals known by the scientific community to cause harm to humans...and our state does the courtesy of letting people know what the corporations are putting in their products to sell you without letting you know if there's anything dangerous in there...kinda like ingredients in food, or banning lead paint, you know shit that California did and does that gets people all riled up until their kid ends up with cancer from the local water after decades of the local mill dumping theydontevenknow into the streams.

You didn't read my post at all did you? Just went straight to freaking out.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,443
You didn't read my post at all did you? Just went straight to freaking out.
I read your post but it didn't say anything particularly insightful. The first sentence responds to your portion. I imagine it went over your head that you didn't write the things I specifically spelled out so, and granted this might be tough to figure out on your own, it wasn't all about you. I didn't bother to go back and quote everyone's post.

Welcome to a discussion thread!
 

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
6,827
"Everything" is not labeled like that. Given the ridiculous examples in this thread, it's obvious that *anything* labeled is causing some members here to shit their panties.

Wood dust: known irritant and carcinogen for a good few hundred years now :\
But fuck those Californians, keep huffing it up...

Silica dust/asbestos: guy probably poured that sand onto the ground while inhaling huge dust clouds...with a smug look on his face the whole time about who "stupid" Californians are for needing that warning

Coffee: acrylamide used in processing; successfully sued the potato chip industry to have that chemical eradicated from *their* processing after years of court battles and scientific evidence of its harmful impacts...but you'd rather trust Lays and Starbucks to give a flying fuck about your health?

Did the guy whining about his pool chalk bother to look up what's actually in there? The label sure ticked him off...not enough to trigger giving a shit about his health. Who knows, probably ground it up and snorted some and rubbed it all over his eyes and balls just to spite "KaliFornia" or whateverthefuck goes on for logic in some of these people's minds.

It's not like these are banned so what's with all the pearl clutching? 900 specific chemicals known by the scientific community to cause harm to humans...and our state does the courtesy of letting people know what the corporations are putting in their products to sell you without letting you know if there's anything dangerous in there...kinda like ingredients in food, or banning lead paint, you know shit that California did and does that gets people all riled up until their kid ends up with cancer from the local water after decades of the local mill dumping theydontevenknow into the streams.
Don't know if they do, but it might be more effective if they said which specific chemical/ingredient was known to cause cancer. I mean, I know in wood it's the resin, but what about the chalk? What about people who really are clueless? I mean f- them, but if you're going to provide a warning you might as well make it a bit educational too.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
"Everything" is not labeled like that. Given the ridiculous examples in this thread, it's obvious that *anything* labeled is causing some members here to shit their panties.

Wood dust: known irritant and carcinogen for a good few hundred years now :\
But fuck those Californians, keep huffing it up...

Silica dust/asbestos: guy probably poured that sand onto the ground while inhaling huge dust clouds...with a smug look on his face the whole time about who "stupid" Californians are for needing that warning

Coffee: acrylamide used in processing; successfully sued the potato chip industry to have that chemical eradicated from *their* processing after years of court battles and scientific evidence of its harmful impacts...but you'd rather trust Lays and Starbucks to give a flying fuck about your health?

Did the guy whining about his pool chalk bother to look up what's actually in there? The label sure ticked him off...not enough to trigger giving a shit about his health. Who knows, probably ground it up and snorted some and rubbed it all over his eyes and balls just to spite "KaliFornia" or whateverthefuck goes on for logic in some of these people's minds.

It's not like these are banned so what's with all the pearl clutching? 900 specific chemicals known by the scientific community to cause harm to humans...and our state does the courtesy of letting people know what the corporations are putting in their products to sell you without letting you know if there's anything dangerous in there...kinda like ingredients in food, or banning lead paint, you know shit that California did and does that gets people all riled up until their kid ends up with cancer from the local water after decades of the local mill dumping theydontevenknow into the streams.

Which all sounds great and has dick all to do with the simple fact that a 5G deployment replacing current 3G towers will actually be less problematic.

Simple RF theory for the win.

That the conversation ran it's circuitous route acrossed your nerves is immaterial to the basic point at hand. The EM spectrum of this community would improve by replacing 3G with 5G networks. And if they do manage to restrict 5G deployments but 3G goes away as well, (cause who's going to keep 3G up just for them?), then yes, they would in one sense reduce the number of transmitters because no 3G or 5G, only 4G. But with no backup network to cover the thin spots, they'll either get more 4G towers to fill the gaps and keep coverage right, (while creating congestion on the 4G networks), which would again, increase towers that have a greater effect on humans then the new tech does.

But let's not let the facts of the discussion get in the way of your rant mope54.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,443
Don't know if they do, but it might be more effective if they said which specific chemical/ingredient was known to cause cancer. I mean, I know in wood it's the resin, but what about the chalk? What about people who really are clueless? I mean f- them, but if you're going to provide a warning you might as well make it a bit educational too.
Perhaps, but realistically the people who care will care and the people who don't, won't. That is, if you're concerned you'll look it up to see if you should remain concerned. But the knee-jerk reactions against a *label* are ridiculous as if more information that one can act or not act upon is ever a bad thing in this society. We're not even talking about banning shit, just warning people. The jokes about the sun causing cancer: if you don't know that yet then wtf so why would you need a label? But to put it in perspective, we didn't have warnings all over the place to use at least SPF +++ on our bodies whenever we went outside. I don't think I even ever put sunscreen on my entire childhood and I grew up a few blocks from the beach. There are so many warnings about the sun that didn't exist even 20 years ago much less 40 years ago when some of us were children.
 

Meeho

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
5,344
"Everything" is not labeled like that. Given the ridiculous examples in this thread, it's obvious that *anything* labeled is causing some members here to shit their panties.

Wood dust: known irritant and carcinogen for a good few hundred years now :\
But fuck those Californians, keep huffing it up...

Silica dust/asbestos: guy probably poured that sand onto the ground while inhaling huge dust clouds...with a smug look on his face the whole time about who "stupid" Californians are for needing that warning

Coffee: acrylamide used in processing; successfully sued the potato chip industry to have that chemical eradicated from *their* processing after years of court battles and scientific evidence of its harmful impacts...but you'd rather trust Lays and Starbucks to give a flying fuck about your health?

Did the guy whining about his pool chalk bother to look up what's actually in there? The label sure ticked him off...not enough to trigger giving a shit about his health. Who knows, probably ground it up and snorted some and rubbed it all over his eyes and balls just to spite "KaliFornia" or whateverthefuck goes on for logic in some of these people's minds.

It's not like these are banned so what's with all the pearl clutching? 900 specific chemicals known by the scientific community to cause harm to humans...and our state does the courtesy of letting people know what the corporations are putting in their products to sell you without letting you know if there's anything dangerous in there...kinda like ingredients in food, or banning lead paint, you know shit that California did and does that gets people all riled up until their kid ends up with cancer from the local water after decades of the local mill dumping theydontevenknow into the streams.
H2O is also known by the scientific community to cause harm to humans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication

Looking forward to warnings on every water bottle sold in California.
 
Top