Hazards of wireless devices

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View


So far everything I've read about wireless networking suggests that it's
relatively safe, in terms of radiation exposure. What is the general
consensus among users?


Re: Hazards of wireless devices


skip wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~cumulus/wireless.htm para 8

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


NBT wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Excellent article, thank you. So my only question now is, where in my
laptop is the wireless antenna likely to be? I assume it's near the
ethernet adapter (?)

Re: Hazards of wireless devices



Quoted text here. Click to load it

That depends on the laptop. With built in should be in the lid.

Barry

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


skip wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Could be anywhere. Mine is somewhere to the right of the keyboard, on
the other side of the keybord from the ethernet port.

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


skip with the aid of a ZX Spectrum on acid typed:

> NBT wrote:
>> skip wrote:
>>
>>> So far everything I've read about wireless networking suggests that
>>> it's relatively safe, in terms of radiation exposure. What is the
>>> general consensus among users?
>>
>> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~cumulus/wireless.htm para 8
>
> Excellent article, thank you. So my only question now is, where in my
> laptop is the wireless antenna likely to be? I assume it's near the
> ethernet adapter (?)

Mine's in the base of my laptop, underneath on the right hand side - gives a
real good signal, not, so I use a pcmcia card instead.





Re: Hazards of wireless devices


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Anywhere at all.  My Dell Latitude D600 has one in two corners of the
base, upper left and lower right IIRC.  Sometimes they are in the lid,
but the D600 has very good RF coverage, so placement is probably less
important than design (or Dell got lucky).


Re: Hazards of wireless devices


http://www.revolt.co.uk/news169.html

The NRPB already acknowledges that there is international consensus on the
fact that the incidence of childhood leukaemia is doubled at a magnetic
field of 0.4 microtesla, which is exceeded under most powerlines.  In March
2004, the NRPB reduced the national magnetic field exposure guidelines from
1,600 microtesla to 100 microtesla...



Re: Hazards of wireless devices


On Mon, 09 May 2005 23:39:54 GMT, "Cymbal Man Freq." <Don't
Bother@ForgedPostsAnonymous.unorg> wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

60Hz fields are not the same as 2,400,000,000Hz fields.
The magnetic field from a 2.4Ghz antenna is essentially gone at about
2-3 wavelengths (end of near field) or about 40cm.  I was going to
calculate the magnetic field produced by a 2.4Ghz radiator but I
forgot how.  As I recall, it's very very small.


On the leukemia front, from:
  http://www.state.nj.us/health/cancer/child/chap2c.htm

====
Exposure to electromagnetic fields was first linked with childhood
leukemia in a 1979 study in which children in Denver, Colorado living
near electric wires with high capacity had two to three times greater
risk of ALL than other children. While studies in Los Angeles County
and Sweden corroborated these findings, other study results in Denmark
and Finland did not. The most recent and comprehensive study of
electromagnetic fields was conducted in the United States and failed
to find any significant associations. This study did not have some of
the methodological flaws of the previous ones. An National Institutes
of Health and Department of Energy panel concluded that the
epidemiological evidence that exposure to electromagnetic fields
causes cancer in children is limited. While scientists continue to
investigate the issue, the evidence to date indicates that exposure to
electromagnetic fields is not likely to greatly increase the risk of
leukemia among children.
====

The problem with childhood leukemia epidemiology research is that the
number of cases found living under power lines is rather small,
approximately 4 cases per 100,000 per year for the US average.  Out of
a 300 million US population, the under 15 age group is approx 20% or
60 million yielding approximately 2,400 leukemia cases per year.  Out
of those 2,400 approximately 15 live under power lines (without
consideration for exposure times).  When combined with other potential
sources of environmental and hereditary risks, a very small change in
the number of cases, will cause a drastic change in the *RATE* of
leukemia cases.  

There is also a tendency for lower income families to live under power
lines.  Lower income families also tend to move around more, resulting
in huge errors in exposure times.  Even the divorce rate, which tends
to have the kids moving erratically from one parents residence to the
other causes huge errors in exposure calculations.  There was also a
muddle over whether to only count new cases or include existing cases.
While still in college, a ladyfriend reduced the original data for one
such study to the number of hours per year each child was exposed to
power line magnetic fields, and found that living under power lines
actually reduced the risk of childhood leukemia.

While I personally believe that long term exposure to ANY source of
radiation, whether solar, nuclear, or electromagnetic, has health
implications, my reading of the currently fashionable health scares
shows little in the way of solid proof and repeatable tests.  Methinks
the suspicions are real, but the evidence is suspect.


--
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558

Re: Hazards of wireless devices



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Completely safe, as long as you don't use it to offend anyone.

Barry

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


skip wrote:
> So far everything I've read about wireless networking suggests that it's
> relatively safe, in terms of radiation exposure. What is the general
> consensus among users?

Considering that (1) WiFi radiated power levels are much lower than
cellphones, and that (2) WiFi antennas are much farther away from
sensitive tissue than cellphones, it seems clear that WiFi is way
less dangerous than cellphones.

So, do you see piles of corpses clutching cellphones to their heads?

That specious Chicago lawsuit only demonstrates that one result of
modern technology is to convert ambulance chasers to antenna chasers.
--
Cheers, Bob


Re: Hazards of wireless devices


On Sun, 08 May 2005 08:06:07 -0400, Bob Willard

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It's always fun to play with the statistic.  (Yeah, I'm weird).

  http://www.networkworld.com/research/2001/0702featside.html
  "The incidence of brain cancer has increased 25% since 1973,
  according to the National Cancer Institute. Each year,
  185,000 Americans will be diagnosed with a primary or
  metastatic brain tumor, according to the National Brain
  Tumor Foundation."

Obviously, this correlates with the increase in cell phone use.  Seems
obvious?  Cause and effect?  

Methinks not.  In the 1980's, Positron Emission Tomography (PET-CT)
and other cancer diagnostic techniques have greatly improved the
detection and location of cancer.  Also note that the study included
metastatic brain tumors, which are caused by cancers elsewhere in the
body that has spread to the brain.  The combination of better
detection methods and inclusion of an indirect cause, would more than
explain the 25% rise in brain cancer incidence.

Incidentally... one of my better product ideas was a mobile cell phone
detector.  It would look and work much like a radar speed trap
detector.  Place it on the dash of your vehicle and it will detect
anyone using a cell phone withing a few hundred feet.  That should
give a clue that there is at least one distracted driver that is not
paying attention, and should give sufficient time to get out of their
way before they precipitate a traffic accident.


--
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

i'm not risking my brain to take a 99.9% of the time, trivial phone call.
((:

--redpill



Re: Hazards of wireless devices


RedpIll wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

"What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being
very wasteful. How true that is."
- Vice President Dan Quayle
--
For some, it's too late. Go ahead and use the phone.

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


Rgr with the aid of a ZX Spectrum on acid typed:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Dan had 50 mobile phones that he would use at once. Maybe explains a lot of
things...


Re: Hazards of wireless devices



Quoted text here. Click to load it

In my dreams.


Re: Hazards of wireless devices


>skip wrote:
>> So far everything I've read about wireless networking suggests
>> that it's relatively safe, in terms of radiation
>> exposure. What is the general consensus among users?
>
>Considering that (1) WiFi radiated power levels are much lower than
>cellphones, and that (2) WiFi antennas are much farther away from
>sensitive tissue than cellphones, it seems clear that WiFi is way
>less dangerous than cellphones.
>
>So, do you see piles of corpses clutching cellphones to their heads?

Wellll...  there is the possibility that cell phones don't kill
people, but merely make them significantly stupid.

Look around and see if there isn't just a pile of brain damaged
people clutching cell phones... :-)

--
Floyd L. Davidson           <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)                         floyd@barrow.com


Re: Hazards of wireless devices



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wireless causes anxiety, poverty, confusion, elevated blood pressure,
and sleeplessness.  Before I got started in wireless, I had a steady
hand, full head of hair, decent bank balance, and positive attitude.
After years of exposure to wireless, the hands are shaking, the hair
is falling out, the bank account depleted, and I've developed a truely
cynical attitude.  Obviously, this could only be caused by wireless
exposure.  
  
--
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
I find women can have a similar effect.

Re: Hazards of wireless devices


NBT wrote:
>> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> So far everything I've read about wireless networking suggests
>>>> that it's relatively safe, in terms of radiation exposure. What is
>>>> the general consensus among users?
>>>
>>>
>>> Wireless causes anxiety, poverty, confusion, elevated blood
>>> pressure, and sleeplessness.  Before I got started in wireless, I
>>> had a steady hand, full head of hair, decent bank balance, and
>>> positive attitude. After years of exposure to wireless, the hands
>>> are shaking, the hair is falling out, the bank account depleted,
>>> and I've developed a truely cynical attitude.  Obviously, this
>>> could only be caused by wireless exposure.
>>>
>> I find women can have a similar effect.

Not so  in my experience, the giveaway is much more damage to the bank
account :-)
--
He had a mind so fine that no idea could violate it.
-- T. S. Eliot (on Henry James)




Site Timeline