College Bans Wi-Fi Over Health ConcernsPresident: students could face 'chronic exposure'( old news - 12:12PM Wednesday Feb 22 2006) tags: wireless · OdditiesBoing Boing reports that the president of Canada's Lakehead University, Fred Gilbert, has banned the use of WiFi on campus because he's worried about health concerns. Likening the impact to second hand smoke, he believes in thirty to fourty years you'll start seeing the problems Wi-Fi caused. "All I'm saying is while the jury's out on this one, I'm not going to put in place what is potential chronic exposure for our students," he said. "Admittedly that's highest around the locations of the antenna sites and the wireless hotspots, but those are the places people tend to gravitate to because they get the best reception." Despite little to no data suggesting a negative health impact, this isn't the first time we've seen this. A group of Illinois parents sued their local school to stop them from offering Wi-Fi, their filing (pdf) claiming there's "substantial and growing body of scientific literature studying and outlining the serious health risks that exposure to low intensity, but high radio frequency ("RF") poses to human beings, particularly children."
Related:- Cindy McCain Gets Her Own Verizon Cell Tower
- Cellphone Inventor Knocks Carriers, Smart Phones
- Startup Offers Smart Phone Rentals
- New Verizon Femtocell Service Is A Bad Joke
- Verizon Of Little Help In Manhunt
- T-Mobile Wavers On Plan To Charge For Paper Bills
- Broadband Derailed By Fears Of Mutant Garlic
- Parachutist Jumps From TV Tower
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 |  | Driscollw
join:2003-01-11
Virginia Beach, VA
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you Excellent point. If people knew of all the "stuff" around your body they would freak. Cell Phones getting banned?NO, Smoking ? Maybe I'm not sure. Smoking is almost illegal. Put your nextel near speakers and/or monitors while your talking. See what happens. This is just BS. I thought people were smarter at colleges. LOL. Joking around. | |
| | | 
AnonymousPerson
@optonline.net | Re: Everything will eventually kill you What gets me is that they cite that is has not been around a long time when the fact is that we have been broadcasting analog TV and radio for decades on similar frequencies, and those have not done a thing. | |
| | | | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by AnonymousPerson :
What gets me is that they cite that is has not been around a long time when the fact is that we have been broadcasting analog TV and radio for decades on similar frequencies, and those have not done a thing.
I'm not saying I agree with them, but there's a distance factor that comes into play. It's not the being exposed to RF radiation that's the issue, it's the amount of energy that rf imparts which, in this case, is a function of the power of and the distance from the antenna.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. | |
| | | | | 
Frydays
join:2005-10-21
USA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by Combat Chuck  :said by AnonymousPerson :
What gets me is that they cite that is has not been around a long time when the fact is that we have been broadcasting analog TV and radio for decades on similar frequencies, and those have not done a thing.
I'm not saying I agree with them, but there's a distance factor that comes into play. It's not the being exposed to RF radiation that's the issue, it's the amount of energy that rf imparts which, in this case, is a function of the power of and the distance from the antenna. this means people using 3rd party firmaware to get more power from the wireless routers are more then likely to get brain cancer then everyone else right ? | |
| | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by Frydays :this means people using 3rd party firmaware to get more power from the wireless routers are more then likely to get brain cancer then everyone else right ? Probably, but the number is going to be statistically insignificant. People that aren't sleeping on their routers aren't going to get cancer from them.
My main concern is that there seem to be a lot of people posting that don't understand that there is a big difference between a 1 watt transmitter 1 inch away and a 1 watt transmitter a foot away.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. | |
| | | | | Wildman4416
join:2006-02-10
Fort Wayne, IN
| Let's bring people up to speed on this. The operating frequency of Wi-fi is the same as your microwave oven. Hmm would you stick your head into a microwave?? Granted the frequency is the same but the power it transmitts is much lower, so the immediate impact on humans is not so easily known. If you want to talk frequencies, then lest look to the cordless phones they operate on the same frequencies and those much higher, (2.4 GHz, and 5.8 GHz) maybe they should ban all equipment that operates in the microwave frequency range. | |
| | | | | | | | | 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| said by AnonymousPerson :
we have been broadcasting analog TV and radio for decades on similar frequencies Not quite. Television tops out at around 800MHz (channel 69) on the UHF band and soon that will be be scaled back to below 700MHz when we go all digital. WiFi runs in the unlicensed 2400MHz band and uses the same frequencies as microwave ovens though at much lower power. You are basically dealing with extremely low power from WiFi stations. Of course all of this harkens back to when cell towers were first being sited and everyone was running around screaming they were going to glow in the dark. For matter of reference, cellular PCS (T-Mobile, Cingular) runs at 1900MHz.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
| | | | 
herb77
join:2005-02-23
Fort Myers, FL
| said by AnonymousPerson :
What gets me is that they cite that is has not been around a long time when the fact is that we have been broadcasting analog TV and radio for decades on similar frequencies, and those have not done a thing.
Cancer rates are on the rise. | |
| | | | | icecold976
join:2002-07-20
Orlando, FL
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you So is the living age of humans. I think we are getting close to saying that man will live for what 78 years now for the US. It goes to reason that the reason cancer is on the rise is that people are living so much longer now a days, that it gives cancer much great chance of growing.
Shoot at 1900, the American Life expectency was what, 45 years old.
Considering we know that there is a much greater risk of cancer the older you get, its just common sense with the life Expectency rising so fast, that we would see more cancer. | |
| | | | yabos
join:2003-02-16
Ingersoll, ON | How many people put a tv/radio transmitter 4 inches from their gonads? Yeah it's only 100mW or so but still there's no evidence to show it's not harmful. And no evidence to say it is harmful either but this guy wants to stay safe. | |
| | | | | | | 
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| What those parents are missing is that there is NOT a real growing concern about it. No more among scientist than cell phones causing cancer, because they just don't!! It's just another $$$ scam to start selling stuff to "protect" you from the radiation that wifi uses. Not like the massive amount of natural radiation that you get just walking outside is higher than 100 years of radiation from the wifi. There is no health concern, only concern to make money by scamming others. Please people, know that the scientific process is very straight forward. Collect information, make theories, compare with others, decide on what fits best. You can always find a quack to spin the numbers and make it seem like a concern, but for the rest of us it's not nor should it be. Cell phones have been around for 20+ years, why don't we all have cancer now? Wifi has been around for a while too, I don't see any related cases of cancer or other health concerns that can be linked to it.
It's just junk science! | |
| | 
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| said by Logan 5 :Drinking large amouts ofBeer/Alcohol will also cause 'health concerns' but you don't see them banning drinking on campus or in the dorms/frathouses....do you. In fact, a lot of campuses are doing just that. | |
| | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by Cheese :said by Logan 5 :Drinking large amouts ofBeer/Alcohol will also cause 'health concerns' but you don't see them banning drinking on campus or in the dorms/frathouses....do you. In fact, a lot of campuses are doing just that. Good luck. In most dorms, the residents freshmen/sophmore and are under 21, so alcohol there is already illegal. To further it up, and say that alcohol is banned at all student housing has absolutely no teeth. Good luck trying to criminalize alcohol possession on the apartment scene.
Unless the college is willing to do a door-to-door inspection for alcohol, I doubt it'll go anywhere. | |
| | | |
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by Thaler :said by Cheese :said by Logan 5 :Drinking large amouts ofBeer/Alcohol will also cause 'health concerns' but you don't see them banning drinking on campus or in the dorms/frathouses....do you. In fact, a lot of campuses are doing just that. Good luck. In most dorms, the residents freshmen/sophmore and are under 21, so alcohol there is already illegal. To further it up, and say that alcohol is banned at all student housing has absolutely no teeth. Good luck trying to criminalize alcohol possession on the apartment scene. Unless the college is willing to do a door-to-door inspection for alcohol, I doubt it'll go anywhere. It's the school, they set the policy, not the students, if they say alcohol is banned, it's banned, if caught with it, they will be penalized. Not to much to it. Also, I never said ALL schools. In fact, it was just in the news recently that some parents found their underage kids in pictures, at school, with alcohol in their hands on a website, myspace if I remember right. With this, this might start changing policies at a lot of schools. I don't know, AFAIC, if they drink, that's their option, just don't drink and drive. That's all I ask. | |
| | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by Cheese :It's the school, they set the policy, not the students, if they say alcohol is banned, it's banned, if caught with it, they will be penalized. I'm just saying a policy like that has no teeth.
A.) Nobody brings drinks to campus. Class might be boring, but not that boring.
B.) It already "criminalizes" the act of 21 having alcohol. If caught by police, it will be handled; a school "ban" is just icing ontop of the act.
As per the school imposing will upon student housing, I was coming from my college experience in UCSB. Some colleges come close to "owning" the surrounding town, and some like UCLA, literally do own the land(s) surrounding them. If they would actively like to pursue underage drinking, based upon their will, then to that I say "good luck". Unless explicitly stated otherwise on your apartment rentals, I don't see how the campus will be able to see within campus appartments - where the majority of the banned drinking would take place.
A college ban on underage drinking is similar to a ban on guns. Those caught using/doing the illegal actions were already breaking the law - another one to break does no better. | |
| | | | | | 
danawhitaker
Space...The Final Frontier
Premium
join:2002-03-02
Urbandale, IA
·MSN
·Mediacom
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you "A.) Nobody brings drinks to campus. Class might be boring, but not that boring."
Plenty of people drink on campus. Not *usually* in class, but don't be naive. There are plenty of dorm parties that have alcohol present, despite the university maintining the image of a dry campus. There are also school-sponsored on-campus events which will attract alcohol. It got so out-of-hand at my college one year they considered cancelling the event and eventually just prohibited people from bringing anything of their own to drink, and all kinds of other stupid restrictions that sucked the life out of everything.
That being said, enforcement was minimal for on campus parties, or Greek parties (even though all frats and sororities were supposed to be dry). I imagine that if they pursued enforcement too heavily it would probably end up harming the college financially.
Back to the topic at hand, though, the banning of wifi...well, they just shot themselves in the foot. If I were a prospective student, or the parent of a prospective student, I'd be steering my sights toward a college with a less myopic, paranoid person at the helm. Decisions like this give an indication, at least to me, of the kind of system-wide thinking that goes on, and it's not the kind of environment I'd want to live in, nor have my child at.
--
You're watching Sports Night on CSC so stick around... | |
| | | | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you said by danawhitaker :Plenty of people drink on campus. Not *usually* in class, but don't be naive. There are plenty of dorm parties that have alcohol present, despite the university maintining the image of a dry campus. I dunno. All the social events ever worth meantioning at our schools (and which featured drinks) were never actually conducted on campus. Having a wild kegger at the student apartments just near campus is not the same as alcohol on campus - which is what we were talking about. Maybe sports gatherings might be different, but that caters to a crowd of various audiences, not soley the students.
It is not the college's legal responsibility about what happens off campus. Sure, they have a vested interest in what occurs, but they are in no position to demand off-campus locations follow campus rules. | |
| | | | | | | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you Hey guys,
This place is not in the USA. The USA is the only country, among those where alcohol is legal, where the age is as high as 21 (thanks to the MADD neo-prohibitionists and politicians who decided it was easier to attack younger people who don't vote much, rather than just getting tougher on drunk drivers).
It legal in Canada for most college students to drink. | |
| | | | | | | | | 
koolman2
Premium
join:2002-10-01
Anchorage, AK
·GCI.net
| Re: Everything will eventually kill you Not true. There are two other countries that I know about that prohibit consumption of alcohol to anyone under the age of 21, which happen to be Fiji and Ukraine.
If I remember correctly, states have the power to change the age to under 21 (down to 18), but they lose some highway transportation funding if they do so.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_age_···es#O_-_V
--
"I wonder if other dogs think poodles are members of a weird religious cult." -Rita Rudner | |
| | | | Armour
join:2002-01-08
Scarborough, ON | 19 here in Ontario where Lakehead is and 18 if you live in Quebec | |
| | | 
53059959
Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone | they do do dorm door-to-door inspection. its announced in advanced though, so anyone with half a brain hides the booze away. does not happen often though. | |
| | | | 
King P
Don't blame me. I voted for Ron Paul
Premium
join:2004-11-17
Inman, SC | Re: Everything will eventually kill you not to get off topic, but I remember hearing of a guy whos dorm was do do'd by some other kids. They lit a paper bag on fire, and set it in front of his door...hahahaha...wow good ol' college. | |
| |
herb77
join:2005-02-23
Fort Myers, FL | God I hope I don't die because I have a Wifi Linksys Router in my bedroom. | |
| rileyjam514
There You Go Again...
join:2005-06-26
Kearny, NJ
| Hmmm... And will they be taking some cookies with their Kool-Aid?
Seriously, if they're worried about radio signals causing sickness, wouldn't it be smarter to go after cell phones first?
Additionally, with the size and abilities of most routers, it becomes practically impossible to enforce a ban like this. It's going to turn into Prohibition at that school.
It's more likely that this person is posturing and preparing to step down as president, to hop into something else - lobbying, for example.
--
Abortion is murder, Reagan was a hero, Clinton was a sleazeball, Iraq is much better off without Saddam, and the telcos are not trustworthy with American tax dollars. There! I've managed to offend a significant portion of BBR! | |
| | | | |
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Hmmm... said by GOLFnSUN :said by rileyjam514 :And will they be taking some cookies with their Kool-Aid? Seriously, if they're worried about radio signals causing sickness, wouldn't it be smarter to go after cell phones first? I don't buy into them, but at least studies have been done on cell phone use that claims that having a phone up next to your ear can cause tumors. But I haven't read anything on studies that claims WiFi use is dangerous. If the college is going to ban WiFi based on what might happen, there are so many other things that are proved dangerous that they should be banning - like driving and overeating. No, more junk science. There is nothing to show cell phones are linked to cancer, none at all.
All you are doing with that statement is helping these people stay in business selling crap such as this below. Anyone can publish a study saying anything. Without hard evidence, it's bonk.
Junk Science in Action for your $$$ Link
»www.cellphoneshop.net/yerash.html | |
| | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
1 edit | Re: Hmmm... said by knightmb :No, more junk science. There is nothing to show cell phones are linked to cancer, none at all. I wouldn't say that the cell phone EM thing is totally junk science, holding a relatively high powered transmitter right up against your brain for the amount of time some people are doing probably isn't good. But the issue is going to be mitigated simply by moving the transmitter a foot or so away; so the solution is to buy a $10 headset if you talk a lot on your cell phone (something I think most people would do anyway).
The WIFI thing is ridiculous unless dorm rooms have gotten so small that you can't be in the room without being within a couple inches of the transmitter.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: Hmmm... You'll notice in that article that they basically say that cellphones haven't been around long enough to be able to make a conclusive study. It's probably only been in the last five years that the number of people talking for extended periods of time has become more than a few.
Look, I'm not saying that you shouldn't hold your cell phone up to your ear at all. I'm just saying that if you use your cell phone a lot you should probably buy a headset and use it when it's convenient. It's not going to hurt to get the antenna a couple feet away from your ear and it just might save you from some health problems down the line; especially since holding the damn phone up to your ear is fairly inconvenient in most cases anyway.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. | |
| | | | | | | toddinpal
join:2002-09-18
Palatine, IL
| Re: Hmmm... Jumping into this argument is probably pointless, but I have to ask, what difference does it make where the cellphone is? If radio energy *were* to cause cancer, do you think it's going to be specific to your brain and not other parts of your body? At best some have suggested that your eyes act like a very poor waveguide at frequencies near cell phone frequencies, but what that has to do with cancer is beyond me. It's mostly a concern for higher powered devices where your eyes may absorb RF energy in the form of heat and the insides of your eyes don't have pain/heat sensors. Some radar operators found this out the hard way.
Again, as has been said before, there is NO credible science that indicates a link between RF energy (cell phone or otherwise) and cancer. The closest any study has come is to show some correlation between calcium channels in cells and exposure to RF energy. The only other well documented effect is heating that occurs at higher frequencies and powers, i.e., why a microwave oven cooks! | |
| | | | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: Hmmm... said by toddinpal :Jumping into this argument is probably pointless, but I have to ask, what difference does it make where the cellphone is? Sigh...
because you will absorb a heck of a lot less RF energy with the transmitter 1 foot away from you than you will if the transmitter is 1 inch away from you.
If you want to expose one small section of your body to relatively high levels a EM radiation for extended periods of time from the time you're 10 years old go right ahead. But wisdom would dictate minimizing your exposure when it's convenient.
Just because there currently isn't any conclusive evidence doesn't mean that a potential danger doesn't exist. The fact of the matter is only recently have people began sticking active, relatively high powered radio transmitters right up against the same part of their body for hours at a time day after day. The evidence is inconclusive at best, and will remain so for the near future.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. | |
| 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Give me a break What a crock.
Guess these kids had better move to the arctic circle, since that's just about the only place in the modern world you're not going find yourself near a WiFi router in the near future.
I can think of at least 10 things in the average college dorm room that leak out more radio energy that a WiFi Router.
A microwave oven and a cell phone are 2.. | |
| | | | 
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| While we're at it, let's just ban the radio, TV, as well as cordless phones, CRT monitors, and two-way radios.
Heck, let's ship that guy one of these:
It's a faraday cage, that way, he's free from the electromagnetic-evils of the modern age. Just hope you don't get a cell-phone call while you're in there! 
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB. | |
| 
dslwanter
Why would I want DSL? I have FTTH
Premium
join:2002-12-16
Lowellville, OH
·Armstrong Zoom In..
·AT&T Midwest
| RF exposure. You're going to ban Wi-Fi? What about cell phones, cordless phones, radio stations, TV stations, microwaves, satellite TV? give me a break. Go to your nearest radio station and stand next to their tower, then go home and sit next to you Linksys, tell me which one is truly giving off more radiation.
--
"Whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do onto me!" Check out my internet radio station: »www.thebomb102.com | |
| | 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA | Re: RF exposure. Coming soon: Lakehead University - The first university to be fully enclosed in a Faraday cage! | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | 
cothrom
join:2005-12-01
Greer, SC
·Charter Pipeline
| said by exocet_cm :If this president has wifi at his house... or maybe he uses his laptop at a coffee shop? The problem the president has with Wi-Fi is, he still can't network his solitare game, and damn, it is a good one so far!:) | |
|
Babaganooosh
@comcast.net
| Put your heads in the sand fellas... obviously most people here are biased for technology, but you really dont know the long term affects of things like wi-fi or cell phones.
Years ago they had cigarette ads with Fred Flinstone and Barney Rubble. No Lie. DO you think the adverse affects of smokeing were even though of? No way.
For all we know all the different waves bouncing around these days is screwing up our DNA. Ok kinda reaching there, but you get the point. | |
| | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Re: Put your heads in the sand fellas... said by Babaganooosh :
For all we know all the different waves bouncing around these days is screwing up our DNA. Ok kinda reaching there, but you get the point.
No I don't get it. We can detect "screwed up" DNA these days. We can detect it being affected by hiking in the mountains (increased exposure to ionizing radiation from cosmic rays and uranium in the rocks, don't you know), but not by WiFi. | |
| 
mikes60
Stop Socialism Now
Premium
join:2001-07-31
Boynton Beach, FL
·AT&T Southeast
| Hmmm And this is how describe their university:
"Lakehead’s Advanced Technology and Academic Centre, a modern, high-tech teaching, research and learning facility, has 15 smart classrooms with leading-edge educational technology to support the teaching process, including GIS, virtual reality lab, computer labs and videoconferencing capabilities to connect remote students and experts to Lakehead’s classrooms".
--
No good deed goes unpunished. | |
| | 
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Crap Dear El president doesn't want WiFi hot spots around the campus he and his cronies don't control | |
| | | DirtyHairy
Premium
join:2006-01-12
Ramona, CA | Re: People like Gilbert... He's gonna look silly at commencement with all that tin foil wrapped around his head. | |
| 
laserjobs
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Las Vegas, NV
·Cox HSI
| How Nuts I graduated from there in Electrical Engineering
All I know is there was a lot of pot smoking hippies in the forestry programs.
--
Trade Entertainment Coupons | |
| 
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL | Just a way to save $$ Just a way to save money by not investing in wireless equipment. | |
| 
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| Radio is Safe People live next to ham radio antennas with the ability to broadcast at hundreds of watts for decades and have no problems.... These people are simply clueless. How many watts are these stock wireless routers? 5 watts? 4 watts? 3 watts? 2 watts? 1 watt or less?????
-Tzale
--
-Proud Straight White Man- | |
| | stoli412
join:2003-02-12
Philadelphia, PA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: Radio is Safe said by Tzale :People live next to ham radio antennas with the ability to broadcast at hundreds of watts for decades and have no problems.... These people are simply clueless. How many watts are these stock wireless routers? 5 watts? 4 watts? 3 watts? 2 watts? 1 watt or less????? -Tzale Exactly. Plus, the (possible) risk from cell phones is because they're right next to your head, and even then the studies have been inconclusive at best. But who keeps their WiFi router right next to their head??? I can't see how regular use could possibly have any health impact. Maybe all those people who use Bluetooth headsets or WiFi phones should watch out though, haha. | |
| | |
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| Re: Radio is Safe said by stoli412 :said by Tzale :People live next to ham radio antennas with the ability to broadcast at hundreds of watts for decades and have no problems.... These people are simply clueless. How many watts are these stock wireless routers? 5 watts? 4 watts? 3 watts? 2 watts? 1 watt or less????? -Tzale Exactly. Plus, the (possible) risk from cell phones is because they're right next to your head, and even then the studies have been inconclusive at best. But who keeps their WiFi router right next to their head??? I can't see how regular use could possibly have any health impact. Maybe all those people who use Bluetooth headsets or WiFi phones should watch out though, haha. I think the risks of binge drinking in the dorms which is SURE to go on are FAR greater than any wireless router. Like you said, cell phones NEXT to the head for HOURS (the average college student) is probably far more dangerous. Actually, the average retard will drive down the street with a cell phone on their ear, putting their life at risk tenfold compared to any possible problems 40 or 50 years down the road!
-Tzale
--
-Proud Straight White Man- | |
| | phantom6294
join:2002-02-27
Abingdon, MD
1 edit | The Linksys WRT54 routers by default output 28mW of power or .028 Watt. With third party firmware, that can be increased to 251mW, but is still just 1/4 of a Watt.
Admittedly, 'enterprise' type wireless routers may put out more power... | |
| | 
lupinia
Premium
join:2004-08-24
Harrisonburg, VA
1 edit | 100 mW, actually. My HT puts out more than that on extremely-low power. | |
| Asmodeus
join:2004-05-26
Spring Valley, CA
| typical leftist envirokook... this is just typical of the type of envirokooks that have percolated into the upper echelons of our institutions of higher learning and higher authority... they use their 'feelings' as a susbstitute for their decision making processes on something like wi-fi being harmful without a single iota of proof or evidence... this doesn't happen just in canada, but just about everywhere...
this disease of envirokookism is nothing more then the modern dressing of perpetuating old wives tales... remember how your mom told you never to swallow gum because it would take 7 years to digest...? do the words bullshit come to mind...? well, someone needs to tell this college 'president' that he is full of the same bullshit...
now if this is a goof story, then it does nothing to make canadians look like creatures of sanity and if it isn't then it doesn't make canadians look like creatures of sanity... what this college professor should have said, "is that the jury is still out on whether i'm a half-kook or a total kook" | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
gwion
wild colonial boy
Premium,ExMod 2001-08
join:2000-12-28
Pittsburgh, PA
| As late as the 1930's... ... there were people who believed that AM radio waves were deadly radiation. As late as the 1960's, some people still believed that TV picture tubes emitted gamma radiation.
If all progress had to stop until even the most superstitious critics are satisfied by research that the risks are minimal or non-existent, we would be just now adopting radar and broadcast radio would be in its infancy.
Just by way of aside, these concerns started roughly at the beginning of the last century, just as nuclear radiation was beginning to be recognized as a dangerous emission. In the earliest days, many of Madame Curie's employees were drinking concentrated solutions of radium. It was a health supplement thing. Needless to say, a lot of those people had short, rather uncomfortable lives. Cause of death, radiation poisoning. The result was, as it so often is, a popular swing from the sublime to the ridiculous. People started seeing radiation everywhere, in the new technologies that were emerging as the modern era came of age. Broadcast radio caused cancers... TV sets emitted gamma rays... well... hey... they might, right? Wellllll... not really... but a non-technical person might think so...
I don't advocate nuclear reactors in the middle of suburban developments, don't get me wrong. But it's important to keep perspective, after all. In order to have a clear sense of perspective, we need to remember some of our past fears, and address our current ones with scientific evidence, not ignorance and fear.
We're exposed to more emr than any wireless hotspot could possibly produce just walking down some streets and building corridors... policemen and firemen have been holding portable UHF transceivers against their ears for decades, now. Is there any correlation between using a UHF transceiver and increased health issues in these professions? The instruments that are used in these applications are far more powerful than cell phones, wireless routers, and so forth, all of which also typically operate in the ultra-high frequency spectrum. We have the raw data... this isn't new technology, it's a new application for a well-established technology.
Much like the confusion between fib-op and what it carries, mistakenly identifying medium with content, we often confuse "technology" with "application". The technology in question, here, is radio, plain and simple. The new application is sending data streams, instead of voice or video or whatever... in fact, even the application's not all that new. Ever tuned a shortwave radio, over the lowest frequency bands? Every ham and shortwave listener out there will know exactly what I mean if I say, "telemetry broadcasts", and they've been around since well before computers were commonplace, well before I was even born, and I'm not exactly a spring lamb, gang. 
Now, in fairness, remember that intense emr can cause real problems. Radar (microwave radiation) doesn't just cook food, it cooks cells, for example. But you have to be habitually standing on the radar bridge, by way of example, soaking up rays, as it were, before you start developing any real problems. In other words, it requires a concentrated dose of radiation, over a period of time.
... hell. All that said, the earth's atmosphere decidedly doesn't filter out ALL of the potentially damaging radiation that reaches us. I would be a lot more concerned, myself, with that "deep, tropical tan" someone spent a week in the beating sun cultivating than I would with the local hotspot. Seriously... how many people are out there paying a tanning salon big bucks to sell them packaged melanoma? Or getting a free skin cancer on the beach? You do realize that deep tan is your skin cells exercising a natural defense, and screaming for protection from damaging radiation, right?
--
Semper Eadem
The violets in the mountains have broken the rocks.
Quixote | |
| therobindust
join:2005-05-20
Sterling, CO
| If that's how we want to play... ...then they need to move every last single school and place of higher education since 95% of them are located under high voltage power-lines which create large amounts of RF signals. Also get rid of all the power transformers since they do the same thing. I believe that leaves us with candles for light, non-electric typewriters for the essays. Probably better get rid of the white board since the markers don't have the best of stuff in them. So we replace them with chalkboards, and the teacher better not use a laser pointer.
 | |
| | Serotonin0
join:2006-02-13
Kew Gardens, NY
| Re: If that's how we want to play... Actually a good place to start would be getting the leap pipes out of schools. A distressingly high percentage of public schools have never been tested for this and thus, have intolerably high amounts of lead in the kids' water. Something you might want to check out if you are a parent.
I know a guy who, as a private citizen, checked this out in New York City, and it turned out something like 15% of the schools came back with high lead. He did that after noting that the testing of the water was being done by holding a vial up to the light.... | |
| 
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA | Wifi uses the 2.4 Ghz band.... And so do cordless home phones that you stick to your EAR. | |
| | wilburyan
join:2002-08-01 | Re: Wifi uses the 2.4 Ghz band.... Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!!!!
lol.
Stupid people who freak out over things they know nothing about should be lined up and shot :S | |
| Serotonin0
join:2006-02-13
Kew Gardens, NY
| This Stopped Me From Putting WiFi In My Home I could care less about myself but with a 2 year old I take no chances. I'm not going to take even the most remote chance for the sake of a luxury item. Paranoia? Hippyism? Whatever. Some things I'm laissez faire about but not the health of my kid.... As for the article above, there is no substantiation offered in it for its dismissal of these concerns. | |
| 
rawgerz
In Debt we trust
Premium
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA
·Verizon Online DSL
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| uhh wear tin foil hats? I think someone should inform this guy that MICROWAVES use 2.4GHz at 400-600 Watts.. They defiantly do not shield all of that, just try putting your cordless phone next to one.
Now how could 28 MILLI-WATTS (that's 0.028 OF A watt) from a standard Linksys router hurt anyone? If this is true people will die from microwaves more often than a wireless router.
--
"Hows your French toast?" "Smelly and ungrateful, but this AMERICAN toast is great!" | |
| | Serotonin0
join:2006-02-13
Kew Gardens, NY | Re: uhh wear tin foil hats? Now that's what I'm talking about. Real numbers and point of comparison. Nicely done. That's really all it takes folks. | |
| | | 
SimbaTLK1
Rawrrr
join:2001-09-07
Bethel Park, PA
clubs:
| Re: uhh wear tin foil hats? said by Serotonin0 :... with a 2 year old I take no chances. I'm not going to take even the most remote chance for the sake of a luxury item... said by Serotonin0 :Now that's what I'm talking about. Real numbers and point of comparison. Nicely done. Being a little hypocritical aren't we? | |
| | | | Serotonin0
join:2006-02-13
Kew Gardens, NY | Re: uhh wear tin foil hats? No.
For example with some health risks, the scientific data indicates you are playing russian roulette. However, these numbers strongly suggest that gun is a squirt pistol, meaning it is not a gamble. See? | |
| | | | |
SimbaTLK1
Rawrrr
join:2001-09-07
Bethel Park, PA
clubs:
| Re: uhh wear tin foil hats? said by Serotonin0 :For example with some health risks, the scientific data indicates you are playing russian roulette. However, these numbers strongly suggest that gun is a squirt pistol, meaning it is not a gamble. See? I suppose, but your quote "I'm not going to take even the most remote chance" is misleading then. | |
| bgraham
join:2001-03-15
Smithtown, NY
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Radio Waves Know no Boundaries As far as I understand, radio waves go almost everywhere. Escaping radio waves is pretty futile unless you want to live in a tin box.
Now there are exceptions to the rule. I think damage was done to sailors working on 5,000 watt antennas on ships during WW2. I would not want to live under a 50,000 watt local radio station antenna myself. (Although you could probably microwave dinner every night for free) Other than that I do not believe you can avoid normal radio waves, so why bother.
I just have to feel that there are dozens of better ways to protect or educate students. Drinking, driving, drugs, sex etc. | |
| 
Plasticman
Will Work For Bandwidth
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Harrisville, RI
clubs:
·Cox HSI
1 edit | WTF Well then they might as well try and ban radio stations, satalite tv providers, and the radios that cops and fire men use as those are also high frequency radio transmissions. And also their cordless phones they are using. I would bet that if such a ban came into place. They would change their minds when they called 911 for an emergency and had to wait for a cop or fireman return back to the station after being out for an hour or more on a pressing urgent call. And get a hand written note that somebody is trying to break into their house, or their house is on fire. Or have to wait for the pony expressman to show up at their home when they are being broken into to pick up a note to be delivered to the appropriate agency.
Plasticman
--
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I cannot accept, and the wisdom to hide the bodies of those people I had to kill today because they pissed me off | |
| | | |
|
|
Everything will eventually kill you
from:
Re: Hmmm...
·
·
