ᐅ Transformer station near new residential development

MachsSelbst schrieb:

On the one hand, that is completely correct, but on the other hand, limit values are based on the current state of research and studies.
In 1945, soldiers were even allowed to observe nuclear weapons tests, and in the 1960s, the sleeping pill thalidomide was initially considered safe for pregnant women. They simply did not know better. Blood pressure values that were considered completely normal in the 1950s would make any general practitioner panic today, and so on.

That is true, but:
Radiation: Lack of knowledge about radiation damage due to new “technology,” radiation was underestimated, tests with humans to observe their reactions to explosions or to check advancing into the blast zone, no studies.
Thalidomide: In the 1950s, there were no strict regulations for drug testing (e.g. no tests on pregnant animals, no centralized drug control, no extensive testing).
Blood pressure: Again, no data available in the 1950s. No studies, a different healthcare system. All this came later.

In my opinion, it is not comparable because transformer stations and similar installations have been known for decades and radiation has been monitored for decades as well. What today requires 10 years to be introduced into society, in the past took only months. Today, (too much) testing happens first; back then, action was taken (wrongly) first and the damage was treated afterward.

Molybdean schrieb:

Yes, and that’s why one must firmly disagree in such cases.

If you have the appropriate expertise: yes.
Radiation is quite complex, so I remain cautious with my limited knowledge.

I see no contradiction. It is like that with transformer substations, yes. But here, the absolute faith in infallible science was preached, and that is at least as dangerous as believing in conspiracy theories. Anyone who believes they cannot be wrong is dangerous, whether they are a scientist or a conspiracy theorist.

wiltshire schrieb:

If you have the right expertise: yes.
Radiation is quite complex, so I remain cautious with my limited knowledge.

In all the areas I have dealt with, the difference between limit values and the field strength at which a potential hazard might occur is quite significant.

MachsSelbst schrieb:

I see no contradiction. That is true for transformer stations, yes. But here, the absolute belief in infallible science was preached, which is at least as dangerous as believing in conspiracy theories.
Anyone who believes they cannot be wrong is dangerous, whether a scientist or a conspiracy theorist.

Science is based on falsification and disproven errors. This means the method itself (though not necessarily the individual applying it) is quite good at adapting to new findings.

And especially in the area of electromagnetic fields, the fear of them is already much greater than all known effects. The few cases where real effects were observed had field strengths well above the limits and sometimes involved radar combined.

Molybdean schrieb:


And especially in the area of electromagnetic fields, the "fear" of them is already significantly greater than any known effects.

All currently known effects. No one really knows what we will understand about this in 10, 20, or 30 years. Maybe there are effects that we don’t know about today.

If I felt uncomfortable with it, I would simply avoid it.

motorradsilke schrieb:

All known effects so far. No one really knows what we will understand in 10, 20, or 30 years. Perhaps there are effects that we do not know about today.

But then you would also have to get rid of all transformers in the house – because, strangely enough, those are accepted without issue. And they are much closer... Field strengths decrease with the square of the distance...