1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News WiFi health risk report based on ‘alarming lack of science’

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by arcticstoat, 27 May 2011.

  1. arcticstoat

    arcticstoat New Member

    Joined:
    19 May 2004
    Posts:
    916
    Likes Received:
    13
  2. Valinor

    Valinor New Member

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2010
    Posts:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Haven't there been studies in the past which concluded that there was very little risk? It seemed to be that this report was the only one that claimed there was a major health risk, which is a bit strange.
     
  3. bogie170

    bogie170 New Member

    Joined:
    11 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    340
    Likes Received:
    5
    Hmm.....
    Low power Wifi signals with a range of meters at an arms length away.....
    or
    Medium power mobile phone with a range of kilometers stuck to within cm's of your brain....

    Who is the winner? FIGHT!!!!!!
     
  4. bogie170

    bogie170 New Member

    Joined:
    11 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    340
    Likes Received:
    5
    *also probably more radiation up my ass than a wifi router.
     
    Fizzban likes this.
  5. Fizzban

    Fizzban Man of Many Typos

    Joined:
    10 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    119
    haha have some rep.

    I would think that wifi is no more harmful than the frequencies we use for the radio or TV. Of course I have nothing to back that view up, it just seems likely to me.
     
  6. Cobalt

    Cobalt New Member

    Joined:
    24 Feb 2006
    Posts:
    309
    Likes Received:
    2
    File drawer effect. The studies which show a minimal risk get published. So do a few which show no difference. No one publishes the results which claim health benefits because that looks ridiculous. Overall it becomes clear that there is no effect at all and that only the publication bias causes anomalies and noise to be presented as a positive result.
     
  7. enciem

    enciem New Member

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    144
    Likes Received:
    3
    90% of people would say this is complete trash. The other 10% died in unconfirmed wifi related incidents ;)
     
  8. aleph31

    aleph31 New Member

    Joined:
    14 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    The guy is just a politician, so he may claim whatever nonsensic stuff he wants -as the republicans often do in Texas with creationism.

    In any case, even though mobile and Wifi are non-ionising radiations, signal intensity is still a factor (causing heat and burning tissues). I think a safe measure would be to keep a minimum distance to the mobile antenna (you know, intensity decreases with the inverse square of distance, so with distances below unit 1, intensity actually increases dramatically...
     
  9. Flibblebot

    Flibblebot Smile with me

    Joined:
    19 Apr 2005
    Posts:
    4,658
    Likes Received:
    152
    Like being beaten to death with said WiFi router by the 90% of sensible people? :D
     
  10. arcticstoat

    arcticstoat New Member

    Joined:
    19 May 2004
    Posts:
    916
    Likes Received:
    13
    There's a great comparative radiation chart here. Love the note about cell phones at the bottom of the blue chart.
     
    Fizzban likes this.
  11. borandi

    borandi New Member

    Joined:
    27 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    128
    Likes Received:
    1
    Welcome to the land of research. Although if you have a hypothesis (note http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1431 and http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=761) you strive to prove or disprove it - there's a very thin line between being neutral and someone calling you biased ("You wanted your hypothesis to work! Your experiments were geared towards positive results!") even if the methodology is so you can do one then the other.
     
  12. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg New Member

    Joined:
    26 May 2005
    Posts:
    5,841
    Likes Received:
    80
    Rofl
     
  13. EzyRyder

    EzyRyder New Member

    Joined:
    1 May 2011
    Posts:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good to know - my wife is convinced it gives cancer so I will forward this to her :D
     
  14. Yslen

    Yslen Lord of the Twenty-Seventh Circle

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,966
    Likes Received:
    48
    You owe me a new keyboard, this one has Pepsi Max all over it.
     
  15. Ending Credits

    Ending Credits Bunned

    Joined:
    4 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    5,234
    Likes Received:
    210
    BAN EVERYTHING! IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO BE SAFE.
     
  16. Azayles

    Azayles New Member

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    399
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ironic, really, that you're far more likely to suffer injury from tripping over a network cable than you are from the radio waves emitted by a wireless system.
    I reckon more people die a year from having routers dropped on them than they do from cancer resulting from exposure to wifi!
     
  17. SMIFFYDUDE

    SMIFFYDUDE Supermodders on my D

    Joined:
    22 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    2,897
    Likes Received:
    103
  18. Apexgun

    Apexgun New Member

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2010
    Posts:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
  19. Neophyte4Life

    Neophyte4Life New Member

    Joined:
    24 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    33
    Likes Received:
    2
    I cant find a reference to it but I recall reading something (popular science if i am not mistaken) about a guy that had to seclude himself (in Russia i believe) from technology because it makes him sick due to high radio exposure in a previous job. I swear i am not crazy. [puts on tin foil hat]
     
  20. Omnituens

    Omnituens New Member

    Joined:
    5 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    954
    Likes Received:
    11
    It's ok, the only people who believe it's harmful are Daily Mail readers, and they live in the technological Dark Ages, so don't even have wifi.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page