Šta zrači 300 puta više od mobilnog, a pored Vas je u kući? 255,638 views•Premiered May 8, 2019

Potrošački savetnik
41.2K subscribers
Prilog iz emisije Potrošački savetnik
http://www.potrosackisavetnik.com
-
Karanovic Lesandra
19 hours ago
Kakvu dìagnozu vam treba dati kada vam pokazu Instrument i koliko je izmereno i vi opet lajete i psujete.
Nemacka posta je penzionisala oko 45 000 ozracenim u zadnje tri godine a Bundeswehr (vojska) ima godinama problema da objasni ili zataska smrtne slucajeve radarista, vezista i sl. Stanovanje u blizini Antenna je bilo opasno i ranije a sada sa G-4 i da Ne govorimo.
-
Nakitu Natako
6 days ago
Da vam ispricam jedan vic.,.Nadlju se tri lika u jednom lokalu u Texasu u nekom salunu...Kaze ovaj jedan..SADA CU SA JEDNIM METKOM DA RAZBIJEM DVA LUSTERA i ispali metak on razbi jedan pa okrznu i drugi koji se razbi.Pita ovaj drugi njega kako se zove a on otresito rece BILL ..Buffalo Bill.. Kaze sad ovaj drugi ..Ja cu sa jednim metkom da ubijem dva bizona i nategnuoroz zavrti burence na koltu i raspali prema bizonima i kleknuse 2 i zali ih krv..Rece ovaj drugi ,,a kako se ti zoves?Ovaj rece Bill ,Pekoz Bill.. Dolazi treci lik i kaze ,kladimo se da cu u isto vrijeme da jebem ove dvije konobarice i da ih zadovoljim!! Kazu ova dva,ajde da vidimo i to cudo..Zviznu on konobaricama ,dodjose one naguzise se i on spusti pantolone kad ono kurcina sa dvije glave i navali on ,vriste konobarice i dozive orgazam..Pitaju oni njega,a ti ljudino kako se zoves ziv ti nama bio?Odgovori on ponosno ,,BILL CERNOBIL....
-
Agent Smith
2 weeks ago
Telekom ULOZIO NOVAC I NAPOR DA INFORMISE KORISNIKE!? Sacuvaj boze.. Pa ova drzava je toliko lopovska da je to nemoguce docarati ni u Holivudskim filmovima i samo kod nas ovakve debilne stvari mogu da se cuju.
-
Krisztián Biró
3 months ago
Nemojte meriti V/m!!! Uzmite pa izmerite Microtalasne zracenja pa cemo da vidimo koliko zraci telefon. I sto novija generacija to jace zracenje ima!!!! Ako u buduce postave 5G(5Ghz) onda smo svi gotovi. Pocece ogromne bolesti da se sire, kao sto su na primer Rak na mozgu, diabetes i moglibi da nabrajamo!!!
- samed2604
4 months ago (edited)
Ovo je elektromagnetno zracenje koje nije stetno kao sto to povezujemo sa nuklearnim zracenjem, elektromagnetno zracenje nije jonizujuce i ne moze da osteti celije niti genetski materijal, tako da je ovo cisto informativna prica.
Opasno bi bilo kad bi ovaj aparat merio u jedinicama mSv/h (mikro siverta po casu) pa da izbaci neku vrednost vecu od 0.2 i
-
А. С.
4 months ago
ЛЕД има лоше зрачење за око, очно дно, очно сочиво најпре јер се повећао број људи који болују од оштећења ових органа ока....тако да електромагнетно зрачење може да се измери и да се смањи али плави спектар из монитора и телефона је мнооого већи проблем .....а о томе се не прича довољно.
-
Stlicek Blaz
4 months ago
Svi vi koji mislite da ovaj "realno dobar uradak", "BS",
Gospodo draga, vi koji pisete negativno, zasto se i vi ne izjasnite s vasim "veleumnim znanjem" pa, da i drugi vide i vase znanje.
Naravno da necete, nikad nista slicno napraviti, vec vi ste "babetine" koje zabavlja "prodavanje magle" i pisanja idiotluka po koje-kakvim portalima.
Ekipi iz Beograda sve pohvale iz "Lijepe Nase" i "Belog Zagreb Grada" .!👍👍
-
Marko Jovanovic
4 months ago
Nevolja je što je korišćen ppgrešan instrument i mereno pogrešno polje. Ovo nema nikakve veze sa zračenjem a posebno sa "zračenjem" LED svetla. Tu nema apsolutno ničega što bi moglo da "zrači".
-

OPASNOST KOJA VREBA! O ČEMU SRBIJA ĆUTI? 364,698 views•Sep 28, 2014 ; 9:22 min.

PRIČE iz carskog grada
1.37K subscribers
O ČEMU SRBIJA ĆUTI?
Dokumentarni film. OPASNOST KOJA VREBA! O ČEMU SRBIJA ĆUTI? podrška lokalnim medijima, „SLAVKO ĆURUVIJA FONDAVIJA“ (SCF) SLAVKO ĆURUVIJA AND HIS LEGACY, RTV „M“–Knjaževac i EKOpolis 2014.
- Doktor Djordjo
1 year ago
ISTI KURAC U HRVATSKOJ, SVI SMO MI ODAVNO UNISTENI NASE NAJBOLJE GENE TRIBAJU SE RUSIT, STUP KRSCANSTVA KRSCANI BALKANCI, NAJACI NAROD. DA NAS CUVA BOG BRACO MOJA, POZDRAV IZ SPLITA
-
samed2604
3 months ago (edited)
Uranijum kao ruda nije opasan, ruda je nisko radioaktivna jer vecinom sadrzi stabilni U238, a jako malo opasnog U235 koji se dobija tzv "Obogacivanjem", najbitnije je da se ne unese u organizam fizicki, a kad bi ovde radijacija stvarno bila 7000 mikro siverta, ovaj kamerman i ovaj sto meri nebi ni izasli sa tog mesta, sahranili bi ih u olovne sanduke
-
Subidubidubi Du
1 year ago
Sve nam je zatrovano, sve, ne samo da im nije dovoljan otpad iz Vince i bombardovanje osiromasenim uranijumom 1999, vec moramo svaki dan da budemo zaprasivani otrovnim aluminijumskim cesticama iz aviona (chemtrails). Ja se cudim da sam uopste jos ziv, ali lupam, jos sam u 20-im, posledice cu poceti da osecam mozda tek u 30-im, 40-im, svakom rakonji treba vremena.
-
rajber kurajber
1 year ago
Jedinica za merenje radijacije se ne zove "silver" kao sto kazu u klipu nego se zove Sievert, cita se Sivert. Iskazuje se u primljenom zracenju u toku jednog sata, znaci Sivert po casu. Pozadinsko zracenje tipicno za nase krajeve je od 100-110 nanosiverta po casu. Ovi sa klipa pored kosnica mere zracenje koje je 300 nSv/h ili oko tri puta vise od normalnog. Unutar rudnika je zracenje vec veoma opasno, oko 40-50 uSv/h (mikrosieverta po casu) i tu covek ne bi smeo da se zadrzava dugo.
Druga stvar, profesor bi morao da zna da su godine koje pominje poluraspad radioaktivnog elementa, a ne raspad. Matematicki uranijum ili bilo koji drugi element nikada ne moze da se raspadne u potpunosti. U235 se za 20000 godina prepolovi, za jos 20000 godina se svede na cetvrtinu, pa na osminu i tako u nedogled, ali nikada ne dodje do nule.

P.S. Iznenadio me je amaterski pristup ovako ozbiljnoj temi, a pogotovo recnik "profesora" fakulteta.
-
Stanislav Savic
1 year ago
Pa cekajte malo,kaze da Gaigerov brojac u rudniku pokazuje preko 7000 mikro silverta,ako je to istina onda je ovo vise od katastrofe!Pa na ova merenja ne mozete pronaci ni u Cernobilu.Jadna vam majka,naravno da onom matorom nije nista jer kontaminacija taman sada kada treba da pokaze efekat na njemu on ide u grob, najebali su mladi koji su rodjeni u okolini ovog sranja od rudnika!
-
BlackZero Rs
1 year ago (edited)
Drzava ne reaguje niti bilo koja institucija jer znaju da uranijum sam po sebi nije opasan i stetan po zdravlje. Njegovo prisustvo se moze izmeriti gajgerovim brojacem ali zraci uranijuma ne mogu prodreti ni kroz list papira a kamo li kroz kozu. Cak i da se unese u organizam, biva izbacen kao otpad jer ga nije moguce apsorbovati, tojest razloziti i uneti u celije organizma. Radnici u rudnicima obolevaju od raka pluca jer dolaze u dodir sa prasinom i cesticama radona i drugim kancerogenima. Ljudi na ovom podrucju nemaju simptome koji ukazuju na radiaciju i upravo suprotno od toga zive i vise od 80-90 godina. Med, hrana i zivotinje iz tog kraja su potpuno zdrave a i hrana koja je testirana nema apsolutno nikakve anomalije niti u hemijskom sastavu niti u fizickom izgledu, cak su bujnije i zdravije od organizama iz drugih delova Srbije gde cak i ne postoji nikakva radijacija. Nuklearno zastrasivanje naroda nije nista novo u svetu a uranijum je manje stetniji i od olova i od bakra zajedno. Ako vam je za utehu, vas teflonski tiganj je 100 puta opasniji od jednog grama uranijuma sa kojim mozete doci u dodir za vreme vaseg zivota! Vasa bakarna dzezva za kafu je opasnija 100 puta od gutanja jednog grama uranijuma cak u jednom danu. Nema opasnosti od toga i nikoga nije briga za taj rudnik.
-
Касперко
1 year ago
Данас је велико чудо што су све паметне мудоње иза монитора и тастатуре. Сви знате да радите и водите Србију боље од Вучића и његових сарадника. Промућкајте главом, узмите сами посао у руке па га завршите. Пар камиона шљунка, цемента, и да видиш како може тај исти широко отворен улаз за рудник да се закопа и да нестане. Поздрав свим Србима, па чак и оним у Хрватској и Босни под другим именом и вером.
- frosinaish100
3 weeks ago
Strasno je ako se opterecivate time koliko je to opasno I otrovno. Postoje ljudi na svetu koji su toliko ozraceni da je to strasno Ali ne znaju za to pa dozive stotu. Vazan je program smrti. Ako vam ga ubace u smislu ako vam kazu da cete umreti od radijacije i vi non stop razmisljate o tome onda od toga cete i umreti.
-
Ivo Bogdan
1 month ago
Na pocetku moram reagirate bez da saslusam daljnji vas komentar i izlaganje. Draga ljrpotice ako u blizini tog rudnika pasu pcele, i ostaju zive i zdrave nemorate da brinete o vasoj sigurnosti. Ako zelite da provjerite dali je voda cista, i ispravna , dovoljno je dovesti magarca ili konja na to mjesto . Ako magarac ili konj nepiju nemojte ni vi voda nije cista a ako se dogodi obrnuto slobodno i vi pijte jer ja voda cista. Toliko o mom poznavanju priroda. A vi nesto govorite sa cime se ja neslazem ni fizicki a ni psihicki.
-

RUSKA TV: JEZIVA ISTINA o posledicama NATO bombardovanja Srbije ; 21:09 min.

ČIČINA MAGAZA
Published on Apr 4, 2018
Category
News & Politics

POSLEDICE NATO BOMBARDOVANJA: General Božidar Delić, dr Milovan Bojić i Alek Račić (24.03.2017) ; 1:06:04 min.

Dokumentarne Emisije Balkan
Published on Mar 31, 2017
Molimo Vas da podržite naš rad, tako što ćete se prijaviti za primanje obaveštenja o snimcima koje objavljujemo. [subscribe]
To možete učiniti klikom na sledeći link:: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c...

- DOKUMENTARNE EMISIJE BALKAN -

Web sajt: http://www.vzstudio.me/youtube
Twitter nalog: http://www.twitter.com/vzstudiotv
Facebook stranica: https://www.facebook.com/balkandokume...

Naš cilj je da blagovremeno i tačno prenosimo vesti i aktuelnosti iz sveta politike za više od 20 miliona ljudi na Balkanu i veliki broj naših ljudi u dijaspori. Zbog naših vernih pratilaca, tim koji vodi kanal će, kao i do sada, težiti očuvanju integriteta, tačnosti i kvaliteta sadržaja, kao i nepristrasnom izveštavanju.
******************************************
Video zapisi na našem kanalu se koriste u informativne i edukativne svrhe. Za pojedine video zapise nemamo autorska prava.

Autorska prava za korišćene video zapise, fotografije i muzičke zapise trećih lica su u vlasništvu njihovih autora i vzstudio.me/youtube ne preuzima autorska prava nad njima.

Ukoliko polažete prava na video zapise, fotografije i muzičke zapise i želite da isti budu uklonjeni sa našeg YouTube kanala molimo Vas da nam se obratite putem privatne poruke na sajtu YouTube ili putem kontakt forme na našem sajtu.
****************************************­­**
Category
News & Politics

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/14/australian-farmers-body-says-roundup-cancer-ruling-is-in-blatant-ignorance-of-science

Australian farmers body says Roundup cancer ruling is 'in blatant ignorance' of science

National Farmers’ Federation says US court ruling that weedkiller causes cancer sets a ‘reckless precedent’

Naaman Zhou

 @naamanzhou

Tue 14 Aug 2018 02.04 BSTLast modified on Tue 14 Aug 2018 03.37 BST

 The National Farmers’ Federation president, Fiona Simson, said of the Roundup ruling: ‘No other herbicide has been tested to the lengths that glyphosate has.’

Australia’s National Farmers’ Federation has rejected the finding of a US court that the weedkiller Roundup causes cancer, saying it set a “reckless precedent” that could harm agriculture.

On Monday, Greenpeace urged the Australian government to start restricting the sale of Roundup – which is widely available in supermarkets and hardware stores – after a Californian court found it caused the cancer of a terminally ill man.

The jury ruled that Dewayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper, developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma due to regularly using Roundup. It also found that the manufacturer, Monsanto, knew of the product’s potential health risks, and acted “with malice or oppression” by failing to warn users.

The active chemical in Roundup – glyphosate – has been classified as “probably carcinogenic” by the World Health Organisation but is still approved for use in Australia and the US.

Homebase to review sale of Monsanto weedkiller after US cancer verdict

Read more

On Tuesday, the NFF said the US court decision was “in blatant ignorance” of science.

“No other herbicide has been tested to the lengths that glyphosate has,” the NFF president, Fiona Simson, said. “After four decades of evaluations, no regulatory agency in the world considers glyphosate to be carcinogenic.”

She said glyphosate – the world’s most common herbicide – had an environmental benefit.

“Through the use of glyphosate, farmers are able to practise minimum tillage – protecting soil structure and nutrients and ultimately increasing the storage of soil carbon,” she said.

Australia’s chemical regulator, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, classifies Roundup as safe.

“The APVMA is aware of the decision in the Californian superior court,” a spokesman said on Monday. “APVMA approved products containing glyphosate can continue to be used safely according to label directions.”

Paul Pharoah, professor of cancer epidemiology at the University of Cambridge, said the court’s finding did not mean that glyphosate necessarily caused cancer.

“These medico-legal cases are always difficult to make because the concepts of risk and cause in a scientific sense are different to those concepts in a legal sense,” he said.

“The epidemiological evidence that glycophosphates are associated with an increased risk of lymphoma is very weak ... From a purely scientific point of view I do not think that the judgement makes sense.”  

Ian Rae, a professor of chemistry at the University of Melbourne, said the risk of developing cancer from Roundup was “very, very low”.

He said the categorisation of glyphosate as a carcinogen was based on very high exposure levels in workplaces.

“The basic measure is that if the exposure is low, there is very little risk ... I don’t think there is a case for stopping using it at all.”

Monsanto’s vice-president, Scott Partridge, has also insisted that Roundup is safe, and the company intends to appeal against the decision.

But Friday’s ruling in the US was scathing of Monsanto’s behaviour. 

Johnson’s lawyers produced internal Monsanto emails that they said proved the corporation knew of the risks, ignored expert warnings, “ghostwrote” research that was favourable and targeted academics who spoke up against Roundup.

They alleged that Monsanto “fought science” for decades to have the product’s health risks downplayed.

Patridge said the internal emails had been taken out of context.

Johnson, a 46-year-old father of three, was awarded US$289m in damages and compensation. He worked for a school district near San Francisco, spraying herbicides on weeds for several hours a day. Doctors say he has months left to live.

Another trial against Monsanto is scheduled to begin in Missouri in the coming months.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/14/australian-farmers-body-says-roundup-cancer-ruling-is-in-blatant-ignorance-of-science

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/14/better-safe-than-sorry-on-chemicals-used-in-agriculture

Better safe than sorry on chemicals used in agriculture

How can you guarantee that every member of a food production supply chain has used these chemicals ‘according to the label’, asks Craig Sams

Letters

Tue 14 Aug 2018 18.03 BST

 Demonstrators march for agroecology and civil resistance against pesticide maker Monsanto in Bordeaux, France, last year. Photograph: Georges Gobet/AFP/Getty Images

Your article (One man’s suffering exposed Monsanto’s secrets to the world, 11 August) is the tip of the iceberg. Glyphosate is considered a “probable carcinogen” by the WHO. The Netherlands banned its use in 2014. This isn’t the first time a “safe” agrichemical has been exposed as potentially dangerous.

The European Food Safety Authority has launched a review into the safety of herbicides, pesticides and fungicides, as so many have been permitted without proper testing. In February iprodione, a fungicide used in professional sports turf, was banned by the EU. Golfers have been unwittingly exposed for decades.

We cannot trust science that was paid for by the manufacturers. Bayer’s statement in glyphosate’s defence illustrates the risk to which we have been exposed: “Bayer is confident … that glyphosate is safe for use and does not cause cancer when used according to the label.”

How can you guarantee that every member of a food production supply chain has used these chemicals “according to the label”? How can you guarantee that, even though you wore gloves as you sprayed fungicides on your turf, a child won’t do a cartwheel on the grass later, or a golfer won’t pick up a ball with their bare hands and unknowingly violate the label’s conditions?

When people buy cigarettes, they know the risks. But when people eat food or sit on grass treated with probable carcinogens, they don’t. That’s why the industry is turning to bio-stimulants, like enriched biochar, which are as effective as chemicals but are natural and pose no risk of being outed as harmful down the line.

When it comes to consumer choice, health and welfare, isn’t it better to be safe than sorry?
Craig Sams
Executive chairman, Carbon Gold; former chairman, Soil Association

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters

• Do you have a photo you’d like to share with other Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread in our print edition

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/14/better-safe-than-sorry-on-chemicals-used-in-agriculture

Share this page