Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible

That also is not true. The suppressed carrier wave is being transmitted, but numerous decibels down from the maximum power being radiated. You might hear a carrier wave if the transmitter was physically close, transmitted signal very strong, but at some distance you may not hear it, signal weaker. This is just academic because all SSB transmitters today have superior carrier suppression. That was not the case years ago.

Reply to
dbu''
Loading thread data ...

Unfortunatley, it only matters what a jury of untrained people can be convinced of...

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

"C. E. White" wrote in news:JbednSC0l5uZXTLWnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

Just like the Vioxx trial.

I remember what the jury foreman said after the Vioxx trial, that the jury understood the defense's arguments no better than, "Mwa, mwa, mwa", like how the adults sound in a Charlie Brown cartoon. And then they voted to convict anyway. Very scary.

Reply to
Tegger

An even better example would be Dow Corning and the 'Silicone Breast Implant'. The entire company was run into bankruptcy for a decade as the result of nothing more than incorrect speculation not backed up by scientific research.

Reply to
Obveeus

That would be a better example of what?

Sounds like you like speculating without the benefit of any scientific research or facts. There has been little scientific research that shows the implants are harmless. And that was why Dow eventually lost lawsuits. They lied - claiming they had done the research that showed it was safe when they hadn't.

-jim

Reply to
jim

I saw this on Autonews today:

Seminar turns to rally; lawyers fire at Toyota At first, the 150 lawyers who gathered here last week to talk about how to sue the pants off Toyota quietly listened to a lecture on legal strategy..

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Lawsuits propelling a company into bankruptcy even though there was nothing wrong with the product?

You apparently are uninformed. Numerous studies arouhnd the world have show Silicone breast implants were not responsible for the problems claimed.

Reply to
Obveeus

Well that is hardly the case. There is still significant risks and precautions involved with breast implants. A trip to the FDA web site and see what they say about the risk:

[Quote] Some of the risks of breast implants include:
  • reoperations (additional surgeries), with or without removal of the device * capsular contracture (hardening of the area around the implant) * breast pain * changes in nipple and breast sensation * rupture with deflation for saline-filled implants * rupture with or without symptoms for silicone gel-filled implants * migration of silicone gel for silicone gel-filled breast implants.

For a more complete description of the possible risks and complications of breast implants, see Breast Implant Consumer Handbook: Local Complications and Reoperations3.

You can also find a list of complications for each approved breast implant in the patient labeling; see Labeling for Approved Breast Implants.

[End quote]

Maybe although it is still quite controversial. And maybe if the studies had been done before litigation instead of as a consequence of litigation everyone would have been better off. But whether the problems claimed could be proven to be directly caused by breast implants wasn't the central issue at trial. The issue that convinced the jury was that Dow was not truthful about revealing risks they knew about and what they knew and didn't know about the safety of the product.

-jim

Reply to
jim

Hi Scott,

Drifting a bit OT, but at 100% AM modulation the PEP is actually 4x the unmodulated carrier power. A 100 Watt AM tranamitter at 100% modulation hits 400 Watts PEP.

Mark

Reply to
Mark

Ergh, you're right! Voltage vs. power...

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.