UK Schools Bans WiFi Due To Health Concerns
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Nov 24, 2006 09:39 PM
from the no-bad-teeth-jokes dept.
from the no-bad-teeth-jokes dept.
Mantrid42 writes "Schools in the UK are getting rid of their WiFi network, citing health concerns from parents and teachers. The wireless emanations, parents fear, may be the root cause of a host of problems from simple fatigue to the possibility of cancer. A few scientists think younger humans may be more vulnerable to the transmissions, because of thinner skulls. From the article: "Vivienne Baron, who is bringing up Sebastian, her ten-year-old grandson, said: 'I did not want Sebastian exposed to a wireless computer network at school. No real evidence has been produced to prove that this new technology is safe in the long term. Until it is, I think we should take a precautionary approach and use cabled systems.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Come on.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Come on.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Come on.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Come on.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Come on.... (Score:5, Funny)
Large values of 1
Small values of 0
Prime Numbers
Et cetera
/Learn Math, Prevent Cancer
ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sorry, but we're not talking about kryptonite or magical dark matter here.. these are devices operating with known technology in a known spectrum-- and let me add, not the only devices in this spectrum. WiFi isn't the only technology to operate at 2.4ghz (and I think some of the standards.. 802.11a? operate at 5.8ghz) -- are these parents seking to ban microwaves and cordless telephones? Even cellphones (and I'm sure many of them at least use cellular phones around their kids, iand some no doubt actually provide their kids with mobile phones) operate on similar 900mhz / 1800mhz / etc frequencies.
Someone with more of a science background, please reply (and correct me if necessary), but whether or not wireless internet has been studied over the "long term" have not several other devices that operate in the same (or very close) sprectrums? How is this anything but FUD?
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would say they should stay indoors but then they are still susceptible to all those cosmic rays!
Obviously, the only solution is to move everybody to New Zion right above the Earth's core.
Give me a break, this kind of thinking is why 3 year olds die from food posioning every year because its a political impossibility to get irradiated meat on shelves sans a gigantic radiation symbol.
Its ill-informed knee-jerk thinking of the most insipid kind.
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Interesting)
There is no evidence to support the parents beliefs that withstands scrutiny, despite 35 years of research. (there does seem to be a statistically insignificant negative corralation between cell phone use and brain cancers, but nothing that is not accounted for by socioeconomic variables.)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Interesting)
Probably, but there's a simple way to find out, secretly turn off the network. If he makes the same complaints then you know it's not the wireless network.
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, the idea that 2.45Ghz is the resonant frequency of water (or fats or sugars), and that 2.45Ghz was chosen because it was particularly effective at heating water is a complete myth. This frequency was chosen because it penetrates into food well enough that it can cook the interior of meats reasonably well, and yet it oscillates molecule dipoles fast enough to make heating, well, fast. This frequency is a compromise between a) heating evenly b) heating effectively and quickly
Huge industrial microwaves used for various purposes operate from the low 400Mhz range to 2.5Ghz (corresponding wavelengths between ~24-4 inches), and they can be doing anything from drying lumber to baking saltine crackers, and yet they're doing the same basic job--heating water. The advantage is that lower frequencies penetrate much better, and that magnetrons operating at low frequency are easier to build to put out MUCH higher powers, and industrial magnetrons can put out as much as 100KW per unit.
I'll concede that sitting in front of a household microwave might be bad for you. I'm not particularly willing to test it out. Nor am I particularly willing to sprawl my naked body out on the desert sand for a comparable length of time*.
*Hint: average total body surface area for an adult male is about 2m^2, solar power density near the equator at sea level is around 400W/M^2, average microwave output is about 1000W. Do the math.
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Insightful)
Idiocy (Score:5, Funny)
I fear little Sebastian... (Score:5, Funny)
wanna bet ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Wireless is minimal (Score:5, Informative)
Wireless is minimal compared to everything else. We live in an electromagnetic world, with electromagnetic waves everywhere.
802.11-b/g operate on the same frequency as microwaves (i.e. in the microwave spectrum); a microwave is shielded by physical means (no, no magical force fields when you power it up), and if you toss a laptop inside (don't turn the microwave on!) you can still connect to it over wifi with good signal. The shielding lets more through than wifi.
We have TV stations and radio stations broadcasting electromagnetic signals everywhere. There's electromagnetic waves from these and the earth's magnetic field all through the air. There's even electromagnetic radiation from space penetrating the atmosphere, although in very very tiny quantities; without the atmosphere, direct exposure to the level of electromagnetism out there would cook you, kind of like direct exposure to the 1200 watt microwave in the kitchen...
Many cordless phones operate on the 2.4GHz range (some in the 5.0GHz range to avoid colliding with 802.11-a/b/g Wifi) and are everywhere. Cell phones operate in that range too. The police band, tower-to-air radio, and Ham radio wade around high frequency EM as well. Aside from simple cordless phones, these are all a lot stronger than a Wifi AP.
Any device with electricity running through it produces an electromagnetic field in some abstract frequency. You get 60Hz EMI coming out of power lines and power cables; once it hits a transformer you might get more, such as the 15MHz that comes out of a flyback transformer in a TV. You won't get the gigahertz range or anything, but you'll get some sort of electromagnetic field just the same.
You can't escape it. You can hide under a rock 500 meters in the ground but you'll still have enough of the earth's magnetic field to use a compass. What kind of idiot thinks Wifi is magically special?
quite troubling (Score:5, Interesting)
the real issue here is NOT health - it is being driven by the idea that young minds have access to a world of ideas not under control from those in power. the Internet has a global set of ideas - empowering, liberating, libralizing, and educating ideasl this is quite contrary to the mentality in most lower schools which are follow the rules, learn/do what you're told, and tow the line.
the idea that kids the age of 8 or 9 or 10 (ish) are educated and empowered is deathly frightening to small minded parents, who are so childish themselves they can't deal with strong people. So instead, they cite some completely absurd health scare to keep kids from easy, broad access to online content.
it is sadly ironic that by applying an argument to protect their health, they will actually harm these children by limiting their access to the Internet
A bit excessive, don't you think? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Acute symptoms (Score:5, Funny)
Re:wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Fortunately, us stoopid Brits do understand enough statistics to know that drawing conclusions about the whole population from a sample of one is unlikely to give reliable results. :-)
Re:hospitals (Score:5, Funny)
hospitals have wireless networks
people die in hospitals, these wireless network tubes must be dangerous things! won't anyone think of the children?