X-GM-THRID: 1202173441387390069 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf X-Gmail-Received: 0684fb54343f29115b9299a66be5ce36ff3e890c Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.54.72.15 with SMTP id u15cs17491wra; Mon, 1 May 2006 14:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.48.238.5 with SMTP id l5mr1609286nfh; Mon, 01 May 2006 14:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id g1si2064291nfe.2006.05.01.14.15.10; Mon, 01 May 2006 14:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Fafho-0001uW-U6 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 01 May 2006 22:13:20 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Fafho-0001uN-IS for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 01 May 2006 22:13:20 +0100 Received: from smtp801.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.12.138]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.51) id 1FahYr-0006wk-T1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 02 May 2006 00:12:30 +0100 Received: (qmail 93744 invoked from network); 1 May 2006 21:11:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO LAPTOP) (peter.martinez@btinternet.com@81.159.159.228 with login) by smtp801.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 May 2006 21:11:58 -0000 Message-ID: <011501c66d63$e1d39e90$0300a8c0@LAPTOP> From: "Peter Martinez" To: References: <4455EC86.2050807@wp.pl> <44567AF2.7000506@ukonline.co.uk> Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 21:11:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-0.325 Subject: Re: LF: EMF sensitivity? Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-2"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 6034 >From Peter G3PLX: Marek: The 'rash' or 'burning' effect makes me think of sunburn or exposure to ultra-violet light. Could it be that there is some ionisation, perhaps due to high voltages, which gives off UV radiation which could affect the skin of the face if it's directly in front of the operator? It would be easy to test this idea by operating the equipment in a low light level and probing the area with a some object that was known to be fluorescent, like a UV-sensitive marker pen. 73 Peter