UK Schools Bans WiFi Due To Health Concerns 535
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.'"
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?
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?
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Acute symptoms (Score:2, Informative)
According to the article, he taught in the same building for 28 years (which would predate the wireless network), and was ill when the wireless network was put in, but not after the portion near his classroom was removed. It seems unlikely that the lighting or chemicals in the air would change substantially in correlation with the activation or deactivation of the wireless router near his room.
Occam's razor says it was the wireless network. Let's not confuse science with wishful thinking in hoping all cool technology is safe.
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:2, Informative)
They should absolutely ban cell phones (Score:1, Informative)
This horse manure reminds me of the kind of person who can smoke a cigarette while worrying that oranges cause cancer in rats.
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:Acute symptoms (Score:3, Informative)
Some people have the misfortune to be allergic to sunlight or even water.
It doesn't follow that because most people are fine in an environment that it doesn't make others ill.
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:5, Informative)
sub-thermal interactions
What's one of them then?
Any interaction for which all of the molecules rotate in the same direction is not a thermal interaction
Why not - rotational energy *is* themal energy.
the thermodynamic limit
How is the thermodynamic limit relevant?
you can't even use the language of "heat" to describe the interaction at this scale
I can use the language of heat to describe interactions from the level of individual particles to the level of supermassive black holes, what scale is this at?
lipid bilayers are polar molecules which are aligned
Actually close to true - they are *roughly* aligned.
the effects of such rotations on the function of lipid bilayers is very poorly understood
At this level of heating it's quite well understood - there is zero effect.
It seems quite naive for the people in this forum to be dismissing the concerns of those parents as uneducated and unscientific
No it's the parents who are naive and their concerns *are* uneducated and unscientific.
There are serious unanswered scientific questions about the interactions and effects
There are serious unanswered scientific questions about almost everything.
you can't just wish or scoff them away
I wouldn't try to scoff away a serious unanswered scientific question - perhaps you can find one.
You try to sound like somebody using a scientific approach to the problem, but you just use "scientific " words in meaningless combinations.
Re:Wireless is minimal (Score:3, Informative)
I just tried this, it didn't work. Full signal outside the microwave, absolutely none inside. Maybe you should check yours?...
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:2, Informative)
2.4GHz doesn't! (Score:1, Informative)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:3, Informative)
No, your 3 year olds die because your food industry uses unsanitary methods, and has a powerful lobby to stop any and all legislation trying to get them to clean up.
Sure, irradiating your meat will kill the bacteria, but that is like taking a painkiller instead of seeing a doctor to inquire why you're in pain.
Read Fast Food Nation for more info. About the only fault I can find in Schlosser's book is that he is far too light on the European industry. Our cattle and chicken may be relatively clean compared to U.S. standards, but I've worked in pork processing, and I've seen every horror he describes in the U.S. cattle industry.
Re:Some simple and possibly relevant facts (Score:3, Informative)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:ban wifi? what about other technologies? (Score:1, Informative)
1) Heat is perfectly natural and it won't kill you.
2) Heating meat is perfectly safe, it simply kills bacteria and that's it.
Perhaps you should also teach the masses how it is that heat kills this tiny living things so efficiently, and doesn't harm people at all.
Is that easier to understand, Mr. Science?