Re: RF biological hazards? (fwd)

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: RF biological hazards? (fwd)
From: Tesla List <mod1-at-pupman-dot-com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 20:12:54 -0600 (MDT)
Approved: mod1-at-pupman-dot-com

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 22:45:08 +0100
From: R M Craven <craven-at-globalnet.co.uk>
To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: RF biological hazards? (fwd)

I am glad to see that a lot of people are commenting on this topic.

My original concern which has been adressed to a cetrtain extent is
that the RMS heating effects, deep inside the body, might be doing
unfelt harm.

I suppose one way that this could be investigated would be to get a
joint of pork, uncooked, and then ensure a path to ground occurs via
the meat. The temperature at some subcutaneous point could be measured
(alcohol rather than Hg in glass thermometer). Assuming the pork is
fatty, the inside would be thermally insulated so a protracted
run-time would hopefully generate a measurable rise in temperature.

Although this is slightly tongue in cheek (pun again intended), the
deleterious effects of subcutaneous conduction would perhaps be
pointed at. It may be the case that a rise in temperature in a person
connected for a couple of seconds to a TC streamer might be
negligible, but I don't think a persons' nervous system would like RF
currents much.

Richard Craven, Malvern, England