Scare stories about the dangers of wireless networks lack credibility, argues Bill Thompson

Well, as I pointed out just the other day, wireless networks can indeed be hazardous so I prepared to read Bill's article with a feeling of self-righteous indignation. I need not have worried.

Bill's topic was not that of unsecured wireless networks as a malware and spam propagation vector. It was a rebuttal of claims apparently gaining currency in some circles that wireless networks are in some way injurious to the human brain.

University president Fred Gilbert, whose academic interests include wildlife management, environmental studies and natural resources science, is worried about the health impact of the 2.4Ghz radio waves used by wireless networks

Last year he decided to adopt the precautionary principle and refused to allow wi-fi in those areas that have what he calls "hard wire connectivity" until it is proved to be safe.

Mr Gilbert believes that "microwave radiation in the frequency range of wi-fi has been shown to increase permeability of the blood-brain barrier, cause behavioural changes, alter cognitive functions, activate a stress response, interfere with brain waves, cell growth, cell communication, calcium ion balance, etc., and cause single and double strand DNA breaks".

Unfortunately the science says he is wrong, and his students are suffering as a result.

Yes, yet again the quack community is mobilising against some perceived but illusory technological threat and Bill is warning against undue panic and lazy reporting.

If the journalists were really concerned about the dangers of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation on the sensitive brains of the young, they should be calling for the closure of TV and radio transmission towers rather than asking us to turn off our wi-fi laptops.

The modulated frequencies that carry Radio 4 and ITV into our homes are just as powerful as the wireless networks, and a lot more pervasive.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Category: Misc
Technorati: WiFi Safety

1. Bill Thompson27/04/2007 18:49:40

Sorry to have deprived you of the opportunity to indulge in self-righteous indignation - I always enjoy it myself It's interesting that you made the assumption that the piece would be about security, because when I was researching it I kept finding interesting looking titles for articles that were about hacking and not microwaves.

Glad you found it useful and interesting

Bill

2. Richard Schwartz27/04/2007 19:05:40
Homepage: http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz

It won't get me. Not with my handy tin foil hat to protect me!

3. Chris Linfoot27/04/2007 19:12:48

Hi Bill. Thanks for dropping by.

Rich, your tinfoil hat is on inside out - your brainwaves are coming through here loud and clear.

Try earthing yourself - any handy lightning conductor should do.

4. Simon Scullion30/04/2007 10:19:43
Homepage: http://simonscullion.com

Chris, I had the same thoughts seeing the title, but read on and was actually surprised there is such an fuss over this. A fun read!

5. Simon Scullion30/04/2007 11:10:16
Homepage: http://simonscullion.com

More of the same: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6602561.stm

6. Jerry Carter30/04/2007 14:37:37
Homepage: http://datatribesoftwerks.com

"Yes, yet again the quack community is mobilising against some perceived but illusory technological threat and Bill is warning against undue panic and lazy reporting."

Dang - reminds me an awful lot of that whole Global Warming thing... undue panic, lazy reporting... you'd think the world would become somewhat more circumspect and stop censoring those of us wi

7. Chris Linfoot30/04/2007 16:33:08

At this point, Jerry's WiFi connection stops working having refocused its attention on his soft tissues.

Still. Saves having to pay out good money for that vasectomy...

8. stan Mrak30/04/2007 18:58:18
Homepage: http://www.electromagneticradiationblues.com

To all skeptics about the dangers of cell phones and wi-fi:
Please keep using this technology as much as possible - we need guinea pigs for this, and you make excellent candidates, since the psychological factor will not be relevant.
There IS science that shows the danger, but the industry doesn't want you to find out.

9. stan Mrak30/04/2007 19:03:26
Homepage: http://www.electromagneticradiationblues.com

Another thought:
Virtually all the funding for "scientific" studies on electromagnetic radiation comes from THE INDUSTRY; why would they tell you if there were problems? And don't tell me that government studies are legit, either. The FDA's real mission is to protect the profits of Big Business, not our health.

10. Chris Linfoot30/04/2007 20:07:29

@8, 9: BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA

Go on. Tell us another.

11. not stan Mark01/05/2007 14:09:40
Homepage: http://datatribesoftwerks.com

Cheddar comes from France.

Unable to post a comment? Please read this for a possible explanation...