Riders ‘risk cancer’ from autonomous cars

Riders ‘risk cancer from autonomous cars

Riders could be exposed to an increased cancer risk caused by microwave radiation from autonomous cars (self-driving), according to a British engineer.

Mark Steele, chief technology officer at Reevu Helmets, says they have avoided problems of radiation with their upcoming Head-Up Display (HUD) helmet.

However, he says authorities around the world are turning a blind eye to the cancer threats from radiation in autonomous cars that use radar and lasers.

He says the radiation from one autonomous car at slow city traffic speeds might be minor, but the power density of the radiation is significantly higher and more continuous at faster speeds and with more autonomous cars sharing the road.

Microwave oven of radiationRiders ‘risk cancer from autonomous cars

“It will create a microwave oven of radiation on the motorways and riders will not be protected from it like motorists in cages (cars),” he says.

“The radiation from these transmitters as well as lasers would be reflected in mirrors on bikes directly at our heads.

“Visors and helmets would offer some protection but open-face helmets or helmets with the visor up wouldn’t. This wouldn’t protect the body unless special suits where manufactured.”

While the radiation from a mobile phone is only minor, we notice some motorcycle jackets include a special phone pocket with reflective material to decrease the health risks of radiation.

There is plenty of scientific material that both supports and debunks the health risks of radiation from various electronic units.

Mark suggests we view this long 1.25hr video by Washington State University’s Professor Martin L Pall who quotes the US Office of Naval Medical Research.

Mark says even though mobile phone radiation can cause fires in petrol fumes, the radiation is only minor compared with the power density of radiation from the many sensor systems required to keep an autonomous vehicle on the road.

“The transmissions are already classified cancer causing and the recent American $25 million National Toxicology programme study shows that even non-thermal radiation (microwaves), which do not have a thermal impact, can cause cancer,” he says.

“Metal pins in broken bones, hip replacements and any other metal implants act as antennas increasing the cancer risk.

“Pacemakers can also be damaged and interrupt your heart and microwave radiation has been documented to cause cardiac arrhythmia and sudden death.”

Radiation interferes with autonomous cars

Mark says the drive toward autonomous vehicles has not been thought out.

He says there have also been examples of radiation interfering with the autonomous systems in cars causing crashes.

Click here to read about some of the autonomous crashes.

Autonomous cars Tesla hits fire engine cancer
Autonomous Tesla hits fire engine

Mark points out that the world’s top insurer, Lloyds of London, decided in 2015 not to indemnify any harm to a human caused by a transmitting device.

“But the greatest risk, apart from their systems failing which would lead to a catastrophe for other road users, is the microwave and optical radiation signals they emit continually. Motorcyclists are not protected by a cage,” he says.

“Government agencies are driving the autonomous agenda and they will destroy the two-wheeled market.

“The negative biological and environmental effects from non-ionising radiation emitters have been shown to make people sick causing many neurological injuries and illnesses none of which have been factored in to the outlandish claims on the economic benefits from automation and the current hypothetical accident reduced data.  

“Roads will inevitably become more dangerous to vulnerable road users including women and children whose body density haven’t been factored into the non-ionising radiation exposure guidelines.

“The race for automation on roads has led to technologists not fully exploring the significant detrimental health effects from non-ionising radiation transmitters.  

Killing off motorcycles

His views of the death of motorcycling caused by autonomous vehicles is shared by a group of American motorcycle industry experts called “Give a Shift”.

“There is a very real risk of motorcycling being completely cut out of the conversation for future vehicle infrastructure systems,” the group concluded in its report. 

“As this (autonomous vehicles) technology grows, contemporary motorcycles will be even further elevated into higher risk categories in the eyes of traffic systems technologies, insurance companies, city planners and autonomous vehicle manufacturers who currently own and direct the conversation.”

40 Comments

  1. Robert.. Your barking and comments on pronunciation just shows how small minded you really are. Have you not even read the NTP Study , so the latest and most in-depth research on Non Ionizing Radiation showing it causes Cancer is beyond your knowledge on this subject. Your ignorance on Lazers and how collimated light poses a significant risk to eyesight is beyond breathtaking. If your so sure they are safe, can someone experiment on you instead of the unsuspecting road user. Your not a motorcyclist, what are you just an industry Shill.

  2. Concrètement, j’ai ce véhicule autonome que je conduis 45minutes le matin et autant le soir sur autoroute, quels sont les risques pour moi dans le vehicile? Et mais enfants si ils m’accompagnent??? Merci de votre retour
    FD

  3. Very interesting that those that bark the loudest on here have the least to say. People who quote old Science or institutions who have No Concept or even employ Scientists who have any experience on the damage Microwave and Optical Radiation have on a Humans biological structures. Interesting that. Just shows how ignorant some people really can be in trying to get their industry propaganda across.

      1. So you haven’t read the latest and most in-depth $24 million NTP study. You don’t seem like an ignorant person so your deflection seems a bit more conspiracy than normal. I see a lot of your posts here and am sure you really don’t know what you are talking about. I suppose ignorance can be an excuse, however your eye safe lazer would be classed as an assault if I shone it into your eyes., Your not suggesting that I do that are you.. Maybe we could carry out an experiment how many hours do you think we could shine the lazer into your eyes to see how safe it is? Travelling on a road having a number of class 1 Lazers firing into the mirrors of a bike or car is going to be a hazard. Are you suggesting only one Autonomous vehicle can drive on a road, And what about the RADAR.. You have become very gullible or complicit in this crime.

        1. The NTP performs a lost of studies, non of which that seem obvious are list by cost, so perhaps you could post a link.
          Shining any light, laser or not provided its bright enough to be either distracting or dangerous would be an assault. Class 1 eye safe Lasers are not bright enough, they are either shielded or not powerful enough to cause damage (and we are assuming that the laser in question will be in the visible spectrum).
          And finally speaking of ignorance, since you brought it up, there is no such thing as a LAZER, its laser (light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation). Your ignorance on such a simple matter is telling.

    1. Hi Robert did you watch the videos of Barrie Trower, microwaves expert employed by the government for many years? I’m guessing you didn’t as you’re still quoting the corrupted institutions without doing any research yourself.

      1. Barrie Trower has been around since early this century, trouble is the science that has actually been done to e.g by the WHO does not support his concerns. That’s a fact. Go all conspiracy theory if you like, but I’ll stick to the science.

        1. Robert.. What Science is that. You are quoting the WHO who classified Non Ionizing Radiation as a 2B Probable Cancer causing agent in 2010. since then the most in-depth study $24 million USA Scientific study shows it is a 1A Cancer causing radiation. . Deliberately shining a lazer into a persons eyes is a criminal act.. What more do you require to show how stupid or how deliberately misleading your comments are.

          1. Do you know what a classification of 2B actually means? I’m guessing not. Have a look at the wiki or the WHO artical or the cancer research that forms the basis of the artical. In that artical you will find that the dosage is a factor and that just about everything in the modern world, like bacon for example is classified as 2B.
            In addition you are conflating a criminal act of shining a laser into someone’s eye, yet make no distinction between a powerful laser or something we might pass by in a supermarket.
            To your other point, class 1 (there is no such thing as a 1A) cancer causing agents do list some non ionising radiations as known cancer causing, UV being the most widely publicised. So I hope you realise that the electromagnetic spectrum is rather large and you need to show this $24M study that you speak of, so that we can assess if your understanding it.

  4. Another article without ANY citations to scientific studies or published articles from the IEEE (the Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers) quoting the CTO from a helmet manufacturer who has released a new and improved helmet. I expect better from an informed source like motorbikewriter!
    Go test the Reevu helmet and let us know what you think.
    Do an article on the latest and emerging crash-avoidance systems that are/will appear in new-generation cars and bikes. The future will be safer for us motorcyclists when these systems become widespread but don’t give us un-researched stories about autonomous cars that are going to give us cancer.

  5. Biggest problem is security.
    Team from Tencent, Chinese version of FB, did it twice, someone in US did it once.
    “Three months since the first fatal crash involving a Tesla driving in autopilot mode, hackers have taken remote control of a Tesla Model S from a distance of 12 miles, interfering with the car’s brakes, door locks, dashboard computer screen and other electronically controlled features in the high-tech car. ”
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/20/tesla-model-s-chinese-hack-remote-control-brakes

    3 times Tesla was hacked, & each time Tesla said it was fixed & couldn’t happen again & it did.

  6. I don’t care whether it’s proven safe or not, there’s no reason vehicles should be driving around bathing me in microwave radiation.

    1. Many in depth studies have shown microwave radiation to be extremely bad for human health. The FCC standards are based on actual heating of the tissues like in an oven. Cancer is initiated not through heating, but interference with the intercommunication of cells.

  7. The cavity magnetron which cooks your food in the microwave was developed in WW2 to emit microwaves for radar.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Randall_(physicist)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar#During_World_War_II

    btw,
    Cooking lens of eye appears to be the biggest presently known problem with microwave/radar radiation. No doubt that will change.
    Neurological tissue is the most radioresistant. Of course, lots of other tissues inside your head beside neurological.

    1. Checking your text messages all the time ruins your eyesight permanently. Any spherical organ in the body like eyes and testes are in much greater danger from this deliberately weaponized technology. The human eye refracts microwaves just like visible light, causing damage. The human brain is obviously affected by cell phones judging by the behavior of cell phone addicts who don’t feel “right” when not sleeping next to their phone. The original microwave safety protocols developed through hard experience in the 1950s by the Bell Company are the ones that are based on the actual hazards presented by this technology. Brain damage was one of the cited hazards. Take a cell phone away from a user and see the reaction. There are companies now selling microwave proof clothing and glasses for those who care about their brains and immune systems.

  8. Robert (the skeptic), I know it would seem reasonable to go to the WHO website for factual information about the effect of non-ionising radiation on humans. However, you may be interested to know that the WHO has been heavily influenced by wireless industry insiders (starting with previous WHO director Michael Repacholi). Also consider that Wikipedia is NOT a “factual encyclopedia” type of source. There have been numerous attempts to rectify their false information about effects of electromagnetic radiation with valid scientific research citations, but these postings are always taken down immediately. So, if you wish to protect your health and the health of your loved ones, always, always, consider the veracity of your sources.

    1. When viewing a Wikipedia article, always click on the talk page. Comments sometimes very revealing eg a wiki article about the dangers of coal-generated electricity was apparently written by someone from the nuclear power industry.
      Wikipedia medical articles are usually of a higher standard than anything else in mainstream media.
      I’m a bit dubious about WHO, better than nothing I suppose.

  9. The cancer risk of self driving cars is fairly minimal the risk of eye damage from the lidar they use is extremely high.
    If the autonomous vehicles were restricted to special road ways a bit like the carpool lanes they have on US freeways and only be allowed to be fully autonomous in those lanes and non autonomous vehicles kept away from those lanes then the operation of autonomous vehicles would reduce traffic and increase safety greatly.
    The biggest problem on any highway is the moron who won’t get out of the fast lane and the chaos they cause. These idiots are usually the ones that also discover that they are about to miss their exit and cut across multiple lanes at the last minute not having these clown in charge of a vehicle would be a step in the right direction.

  10. Interesting article, radiation from self driving vehicles isn’t something I’ve thought about but it is just one more thing to consider. Personally I am not sure I like (in fact I hate) the idea of self driving cars, as a rider I don’t trust the technology to see anything smaller than another car. There are way too many variables to deal with when you drive & I’m not convinced that a computer will be able to handle all the equations.
    What happens when some government bureaucrat decides that everyone must use autonomous vehicles some time in the future to cut the road toll? Will that mean an end to any freedom to ride motorcycles or drive older vehicles?

  11. Over 200 scientists, specialists in this field have signed a letter to the WHO and UN … there is a very short video to scroll down to and watch…. emf scientist appeal

  12. Hi Robert,
    Not sure what you mean by fictitious. British whistleblower and microwaves expert Barry Trower has been talking about how the dangers of mobile phone radiation for years. He explains how statisticians re-classify brain tumours caused by mobile phone radiation to cover up the huge level of harm we are doing to ourselves and all life on the planet.
    There are many videos of him going into great detail about how this is done;
    https://youtu.be/z99_SzoXZdY

  13. Statistics don’t always tell the truth!
    If you have one hundred people with terminal cancer but ninety of them die of something else like suicide drowning a fall murder or go missing in the desert the statistics will say that only ten people died of cancer and the others may not even get an autopsy. So saying people aren’t getting cancer from all the radiation they are being exposed to because there is no statistics saying they are is extremely foolish.
    Laboratory testing of all the various radiation types we can be exposed to is also extremely flawed. In the vast majority of lab tests usually funded by and dictated by they guilty parties they take one or two camels into a nice clean room with every possible toxin or radiation that they are not testing removed then they take one straw put it on the camels back and say look nothing’s happening.
    And if anyone points out that it’s no actually that straw that’s the problem it’s all the other shit piled on the poor camels back they will pile on a load of BS about scientific testing and hand you a mountain of paper all using a lot of large Latin and Greek words to justify their actions.
    I will give you a real life example.
    Overheard power lines and electric sub stations are know to cause cancer especially in children yet all the research and lab tests have not proven this link
    So people try to sue for damages lose their cases.
    An independent study found that in many cases it’s not the radiation itself that is the cancer agent but natural environmental carcinogens such as radon gas and organochlorines and such. These carcinogenic substances are present in most places on earth but can be found in higher concentrations in some areas like the granite belt. Now here is the kicker you can have two identical houses with families made of identical twins split between the two houses and one will get cancer and the other not and the one who did will be living in the house under the power lines near the substation and the other need only be sixty meters further away. The cause is the toxic gases but the problem is those gases are energised like the gas in a fluorescent tube and they are attracted to the powerlines like metal to a magnet.
    So it’s actually not the radiation that is having any effect on you or causing the cancer it’s the radiations effect of all the shit on the camels back that’s causing the cancer.

    1. While Radon is a known and proven serious cancer causing agent, it is NOT drawn to overhead powerlines or ‘energised’ (whatever that means). Radon can accumulate in basements and the most effective prevention is ventilation. If Radon were in anyway affected by magnatisum it would be a great way to actually harness its production, and or removal. Just put a magnet or electromagnet in a box and watch it fill up!

    1. Hi Robert,
      Not sure what you mean by “fishy”.
      In developing their helmet, they have studied the effects of radiation and “have avoided problems of radiation with their upcoming Head-Up Display (HUD) helmet.”
      That suggests that other companies may not have found a way around radiation problems in HUD helmets, aftermarket HUD and other electronic devices.
      Cheers,
      Mark

        1. There is a statistical increase in cancers, particularly brain cancers, mostly caused by microwave radiation from WiFi, Bluetooth and cordless telephones, particularly the base set, along with mobile telephones. Just like when tobacco companies tried to deny that smoking causes ill health back in the sixties and seventies and even employed doctors to say that smoking is good, a lot of the real information is suppressed by those with a vested interest. Never let peoples’ health get in the way of profit!

          Wikipedia just refers to random articles that could be written by anyone, so just because something is quoted by Wikepedia doesn’t necessarily make it factual. The problem with mobile telephone testing is that up until now testing has only been for heat transfer, not for other effects from microwave radiation, but thankfully that is starting to change and there is a lot more awareness of the ill effects of RF radiation, particularly in the microwave band.

          1. Im on the fence on this one, personally. It sounds a little too far fetched, not enough actual scientific proof but then having said all that, sugar companies bribed and hid the truth about just how dangerous sugar is to the human body in causing obesity, tumers and addictions stronger than cocaine, as just some of the side effects.

        2. Robert posting up links from Wikipedia do not mitigate Non Ionizing Radiation risks to us all. This is the same Asbestos, Smoking etc Argument. The NTP study which you have totally ignored a $24,000,000 Study shows that your information is out of date. Time to move on from the ignorance, we now know. Please watch Professor Martin L Pall lecture. And tell me what evidence you have to suggest he is wrong.

        3. Hi Robert,
          Not sure what you mean by fictitious. British whistleblower and microwaves expert Barry Trower has been talking about how the dangers of mobile phone radiation for years. He explains how statisticians re-classify brain tumours caused by mobile phone radiation to cover up the huge level of harm we are doing to ourselves and all life on the planet.
          There are many videos of him going into great detail about how this is done;
          https://youtu.be/z99_SzoXZdY

        4. Robert, your link states as of 2015, this study comes from 2016.

          ‘Where people were saying there’s no risk, I think this ends that kind of statement’
          A major study has suggested there is a link between mobile phones and cancer. The report is an in-depth peer reviewed study conducted by the US government and represents a significant development in long-running controversy over how mobile phones impact on users’ health.
          http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/can-your-phone-give-you-cancer-new-study-says-it-could-a7051516.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *