(Thanks to Miscellanea)
No. This would be just plain stupid.
Wi-Fi puts out about 1% radiation of the typical cell phone, equivalent to background radiation. For an excellent review, check out the full article at Neurologica.
August 19, 2010
8 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
tildeb
Questionable Motives 
Thank you. That was funny!
Comment by Diana A. — August 19, 2010 @ 12:29 pm |
This comment from the page made me smile…..
“AAAAAGHHHH.
Maybe we need to stop fighting this logically. Lets call it WiFi therapy and it cures back pain, insomnia, depression, and chronic fatigue syndrome.
These statements have not been verified by the FDA and are for entertainment purposes only. Call it BrainFi, and sell organic, recycled, wireless G units. They can wear a wrist magnet that helps attract the helpful BrainFi. Why not? good marketing makes a host of dangerous things seem safe and plausible why not do it for a reasonably safe thing so the kids have internet access. Or we can sell the parents a set of 1978 world book encyclopedia’s and they can home school. Either way I get some junk out of my basement. Damn ethics overrated.
Steve”
Comment by misunderstoodranter — August 21, 2010 @ 8:04 am |
LOL! Funny comic strip!
Comment by 4amzgkids — August 21, 2010 @ 4:59 pm |
http://www.mast-victims.org/
Comment by 4amzgkids — August 21, 2010 @ 5:02 pm |
Telecommunications companies are drowning us in radiation and they are in a state of complete denial on whether these masts and antennas have any negative health impact on the population. Credible scientific research shows that especially mobile phone mast radiation is harmful and people are suffering. Some people have even been forced to abandon their homes after becoming ill from radiation.
Nope. Not a shred of bias here.
Comment by tildeb — August 21, 2010 @ 10:29 pm |
“Credible scientific research shows that especially mobile phone mast radiation is harmful and people are suffering.”
My spin detector is going off… it is true that microwave radio masts are dangerous in some circumstances – for example if you stand right next to one, you might get a little burnt. I suspect that this site is framing this type of evidence in their argument – which is intellectually dishonest. Because anyone who knows anything about radiation also knows that distance is a consideration from the source is a consideration.
Some people really need to education themselves as to the meaning of words – light is radiation, heat is radiation, gamma rays are radiation, radio is radiation and so on. I think people see the word radiation and immediately think of ionizing radiation which is the stuff that is of concern in nuclear reactors.
Just how exactly do people think that TV and radio works?
More information can be found here: http://www.rfengineer.net/1170/rf-basics-radio-propagation/
Comment by misunderstoodranter — August 22, 2010 @ 6:00 am |
“[I]t is true that microwave radio masts are dangerous in some circumstances. [F]or example[,] if you stand right next to one, you might get a little burnt.”
Citation needed. And will you get burnt, or not? Your statement is ambiguous.
Comment by [Si]dragon — December 9, 2010 @ 12:44 pm |
It depends on the energy emitted from the source and the distance you are from it – which is due to the ‘Inverse-square law’. It is the same principle with light bulbs – the light from a bulb does not typically burn people, but if you are close enough to the actual bulb it will burn you.
A powerful transmitter might burn you if you stand next to it – after all it is distributing energy and that energy which is normally absorbed by a massive area directly into your body mass. Put it this way – I wouldn’t stand next to one while it was switched on – I would keep a safe distance, and approach the cell site from the opposite direction to its target area – too be safe.
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law
See here fore health effects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave
Comment by misunderstoodranter — December 11, 2010 @ 6:38 am |