DECT phones 'bad' - WiFi 'bad'?

Articles yesterday in the British press raised again concerns relating to the hazards arising from DECT phones and their continuous microwave emissions.

Should similar concerns apply to a home with several WiFi routers in, 'pumping out' 2.4GHz 24/7??

Reply to
__spc__
Loading thread data ...

And the sky might fall on our heads - some folk just aren't happy without something to worry about.... :-) It's even funnier when you see some chain smoker complaining about mobile phone masts - clueless...

Guy

Reply to
Bigguy

Crivvens. The articles probably appeared in the National Enquirer and the Sunday Sport.

Similar concerns should indeed exist. Which is fine, since the sensible concerns level for DECT phones is zero.

But if it worries you, wear a tinfoil hat... :-)

Mark McIntyre

Reply to
Mark McIntyre

Uh-uh! Some folks at MIT (iirc) actually researched the effects of tinfoil hats on radio waves. They found that you got higher energy levels _under_ the tinfoil hat than you did if you didn't use one :-)

Reply to
Derek Broughton

[snip]

Eeek - aluminium foil? Alzheimers, no?! ;-)

Reply to
__spc__

I'd love to work somewhere that gets grants to do this sort of research. I mean ,can you imagine the application form, or the interview board? :-)

Mark McIntyre

Reply to
Mark McIntyre

Only if you eat the hat,

Which is perfectrly reasonable I guess......

Mark McIntyre

Reply to
Mark McIntyre

This makes sense .. the "hat" is a parabolic reflector.. it concentrates the radio waves into your head... nice

Reply to
Doz

I'm sure they did it on their own time :-) Also, iirc, they actually tested tin vs aluminum foil. I can't remember how that worked out.

Reply to
Derek Broughton
8>>

Very tongue in cheek.

formatting link
your own:-
formatting link

Reply to
Bob II

Derek Broughton hath wroth:

On the Effectiveness of Aluminium Foil Helmets: An Empirical Study

formatting link
calibrated antennas. No field measurements. No specific absorption models. No NEC2 or NEC4 models. No grandoise conclusions. No inflamatory comments about other researchers. No footnotes. No requests for additional funding. Obviously, this is not a professionally prepared research paper, is incomplete, and is a disgrace to the American higher educational system. Also, the math is seriously deficient as the obsolete Agilent 8714ET network analyzer was only about $35,000 new (with a typical options mix) and not $250,000. Disgraceful, methink.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

LOL. Thanks for the link - I just knew about this from a radio interview.

Reply to
Derek Broughton

I would like to have seen the presentation for the budget for this

formatting link
Bob

Reply to
Bob II

Cabling-Design.com Forums 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.