Sip Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223/wr_nm/...ada_internet_dc TORONTO (Reuters) - A small Canadian university has ruled out campus-wide wireless Internet access because its president fears the system's electromagnetic forces could pose a risk to students' health. Lakehead University, in Thunder Bay, Ontario, has only a limited Wi-Fi connections at present, in places where there is no fiber-optic Internet connection. And that, according to president Fred Gilbert, is just fine. "The jury is still out on the impact that electromagnetic forces have on human physiology," Gilbert told a university meeting last month, insisting that university policy would not change while he remained president. "Some studies have indicated that there are links to carcinogenetic occurrences in animals, including humans, that are related to energy fields associated with wireless hotspots, whether those hotspots are transmissions lines, whether they're outlets, plasma screens, or microwave ovens that leak." ... aaaaaahaahahhaahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223/wr_nm/...ada_internet_dc aaaaaahaahahhaahahaha What's so funny, I would oppose Quebec universities to go on wireless too. This is worster than cellulars, it is not only few cells but the entire computer laboratories sending waves all over the place. What is so funny about being cautious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 Here, I disagree with Domino. Yes, it's ok to be cautious, but let's get with the times, ok? BTW - All you need to hear is "Lakehead" University, that about says it all. Thunder Bay? It's about 20 hours drive from civilisation (I know I'm generalising, but so what?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted February 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 Pullling the plug on the wireless system because the president thinks it might be dangerous IS funny. That's like Bush standing up saying "the jurry is still out on evolution" ... or global warming ... or making decisions on stem cel research ... who made him an expert on the topic? But the guy is worried about 802.11b/g running on the 2.4Ghz band. The powers of these transmitters are VERY limited. And what about wireless phones (not cel phone) ... is he going to outlaw those too? How about microwave ovens? What's next ... the TV remote? Walkie talkie use on campus? It is true that high powered electromagnetic transmissions are bad for you ... but on what evidence is he basing this decision on for low power WI-FI networks? Sounds to me it's pure paranoia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 Pullling the plug on the wireless system because the president thinks it might be dangerous IS funny. That's like Bush standing up saying "the jurry is still out on evolution" ... or global warming ... or making decisions on stem cel research ... who made him an expert on the topic? But the guy is worried about 802.11b/g running on the 2.4Ghz band. The powers of these transmitters are VERY limited. And what about wireless phones (not cel phone) ... is he going to outlaw those too? How about microwave ovens? What's next ... the TV remote? Walkie talkie use on campus? It is true that high powered electromagnetic transmissions are bad for you ... but on what evidence is he basing this decision on for low power WI-FI networks? Sounds to me it's pure paranoia TV remotes uses infrared, it would be like refusing humans to go to university because they emit infrared too. Hand phones at 2.4 Ghz are few unites, how many does one have at home? In a computer laboratory there are many dozens of computers all being on the wireless. It might be a backward university in a conservative district, but do we really need wirless in universities? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted February 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 TV remotes uses infrared, Not all of them. Many new ones that are designed to be used from different rooms (to control an entertainment system or a satellite box) do use wireless. But why only focus on 2.4Ghz? Why not be affraid of infrared too? While we are at it, how about monitors and CRT tv's ... they shoot electrons out too. Hand phones at 2.4 Ghz are few unites, how many does one have at home? You would be surprised at how many you will find in a very close proximity at a university dorm. Every room might have one. In student appartments, there could easily be 2 or more. In a computer laboratory there are many dozens of computers all being on the wireless. I don't know about that one. Most university labs have workstations that are wired. However, many buildings are now going wireless for students to carry their laptops around. Still, the power levels of those transmissions are VERY low. Maaaaaaaybe they cause a problem but where is the evidence? Shouldn't the president first order a study before panicing and pulling the plug on wireless? It might be a backward university in a conservative district, but do we really need wirless in universities? ABSOLUTELY! It is very necessary these days. Actually, I am proud of Madison, WI because it is one of the first CITIES to plan to provide public wireless internet to people!!!! article here. They recently rolled out the first phase with the downtown and surrounding areas going online. FYI, electromagnetic waves are nothing new ... they have been around us for more than a century. How do you think Radio and TV transmissions get to us? Why doesn't the president of that school try to block TV and radio transmissions into the space of the university for health reasons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted February 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 One of my replies got lost: I said I am not trying to say that electromagnetic waves are not dangerous. I do think we should definitely do studies on the long term effects of cel phone use or wireless headphones and looking to LCDs and monitors and using bluetooth ear plugs etc ... But what I find funny is the panic mode in this case ... where is the evidence on which this decision is based on? (maybe I don't know). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted February 25, 2006 Report Share Posted February 25, 2006 Not all of them. Many new ones that are designed to be used from different rooms (to control an entertainment system or a satellite box) do use wireless. But why only focus on 2.4Ghz? Why not be affraid of infrared too? While we are at it, how about monitors and CRT tv's ... they shoot electrons out too. You would be surprised at how many you will find in a very close proximity at a university dorm. Every room might have one. In student appartments, there could easily be 2 or more. I don't know about that one. Most university labs have workstations that are wired. However, many buildings are now going wireless for students to carry their laptops around. Still, the power levels of those transmissions are VERY low. Maaaaaaaybe they cause a problem but where is the evidence? Shouldn't the president first order a study before panicing and pulling the plug on wireless? ABSOLUTELY! It is very necessary these days. Actually, I am proud of Madison, WI because it is one of the first CITIES to plan to provide public wireless internet to people!!!! article here. They recently rolled out the first phase with the downtown and surrounding areas going online. FYI, electromagnetic waves are nothing new ... they have been around us for more than a century. How do you think Radio and TV transmissions get to us? Why doesn't the president of that school try to block TV and radio transmissions into the space of the university for health reasons? Infrared are close to visible waves, and everything heated generate it including our cells. Cells are habituated in the spectrum between infrared to violet-borderline ultraviolet. So when you compare from long to short waves you have to ignore anything in that spectrum, more you are far from this spectrum more you have to be cautious and more it is a shorter wave more cautious you should be. Even thought visible and infrareds are shorter than microwave, microwaves are far from the spectrum cells are accustmued from because we evolved on the spectrum the Sun mostly emit. Radio frequencies are not that dangerous, because they are transmitted on the Khz or Mhz range, there is no question that at Ghz frequency it has the ability to destroy cells and cause mutation, the question is, is the signal enought powerful, maybe not for a cordless, but we were talking about a cumputer laboratory with dozens of computers on wirless emitting in the same time in a not so big room. I think in this situation there is enough studies for us to be causious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted February 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2006 (edited) Queb... the devices produced on the ISM band have very strong power limitations on them. Their output is VERY low in power (something like 100mW to 200mW?) ... that's why you can barely get about 100 foot indoor range with most of these devices. Your concern is that there are "many of them" ... but again that is not a valid concern because they are not all transmitting at the same time. The 802.11 MAC layer will take care of that. In the base-stration mode (structured) that is how things are done in computer labs, the base station tells who goes next. There are up to 11 channels defined in the 802.11 spec for the US (I think Japan gets 14) but even then, you will rarely see more than just a few channels in use at the same time ... a guess on my part. If all those stations were transmitting at the same time, nobody would be able to talk to each other! Furthermore, these technologies utilize spread spectrum which basically spreads the power on a broader band than traditional narrow band transmissions. This makes the effect of the signal power even less of an issue I think. Edited February 25, 2006 by Sip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted March 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2006 I just read this on arstechnica.com and I thought it was pretty funny ... "The day may come when Lakehead University is blanketed with WiFi, and it may be sooner rather than later, if the president of the school finds the evidence that there is no risk to be conclusive. Until that time, students and faculty will have be old school when it comes to going online. Unless someone points out the strangulation risk from improper use of Cat5e cables." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted December 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2007 Panorama Report on wifi was Misleading and the Official BBC complaint ruling about the issue. ... basically it's all about: "Two viewers complained that Panorama exaggerated the grounds for concern and wrongly suggested that Wi-Fi installations give off higher levels of radiation." I like this quote at the end: "All I can say in reassurance is that this sort of mathematically dysfunctional scare-mongering drivel really makes me cross." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted March 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Another reason why people are stupid. Wireless disruption Sebastopol officials reject offer of free Wi-Fi downtown due to health concerns; proponents say that's ridiculous By ROBERT DIGITALE THE PRESS DEMOCRAT Concerned about possible health effects from wireless Internet networks, Sebastopol officials have reversed course and turned down a free Wi-Fi area network. The City Council voted 4-0 last week to rescind an agreement with Sonic.net that would have allowed the Santa Rosa-based Internet provider to install the network in the city center as it has done in the downtowns of Santa Rosa and Petaluma. ... downtown Sebastopol already has plenty of businesses emitting Wi-Fi signals. In a one-block radius around the town's central intersection of Bodega Avenue and Main Street, Jasper detected 25 such signals. His company had proposed to add one more signal at that intersection. ... Jasper cited the World Health Organization. Its Internet site concludes: "Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects." But critics said good studies exist that show ill effects to both adults and children from such signals. And they disputed Jasper's contention that one more wireless network will have a negligible effect on Sebastopol residents. "A little bit more is going to cause a little more problems," said Jeffrey Fawcett, president of the Sustainable Health Institute, an educational nonprofit based in Camp Meeker. ... Maurer, who said she is sensitive to electricity much as some people are sensitive to chemicals, worked with others to gather roughly 500 signatures from people concerned about the effects of Wi-Fi signals. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.