- Forums - Sign Up - Reply - Search - Statistics -
www.mast-victims.org forum / General discussion / What About Wi-Fi?
. 1 . 2 . 3 . >>
Author Message
James Martin
Member
# Posted: 5 Feb 2006 00:13
Reply 


Wi-Fi, or wireless computer connections, are popping up everywhere -- whether small and local (a cafe or coffee shop) or encompassing a whole city or even county! These systems generally operate on the same freqencies as cell phones, or there about. The power level, and the intensities, seem to be lower than cell phones and their masts/towers/base-stations. But many people seem to worry about these sources of microwave radiation, as well.

[ See: http://www.macopinion.com/columns/roadwarrior/05/04/26/ ]

I know that I would rather spend time in a cafe without Wi-Fi, and I surely don't want my whole town blanketed with Wi-Fi on top of the electrosmog (EMF pollution) I already have imposed upon me.

But, you know what? Every cafe in my town seems to have Wi-Fi installed!
And the next county over from me is establishing Wi-Fi county-wide!

What to do?

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 15 Feb 2006 23:28
Reply 


Hi James,

I've been looking a bit into Wi-Fi in terms of signal modulation and transmission strength. Wi-Fi is also known as "WLan" as in "Wireless Local Area Network".

Judging from the tech spec's, Wi-Fi is an over-the-air implementation of regular computer networks such as the wire-based Ethernet that connects computers in offices, homes etc. What I've been looking for in the tech. specs is basically the "pulse" within the W-Fi standard and there is plenty of pulsing there.
The transmission frequency is typically 2.4GHz and 5GHz, the first being very close to the frequency of 3G but the transmission power of a simple access-point (relay box or "router") is weaker than a 3G basestation, typically up to 200mW.
The Wi-Fi frequency spectrum is "unlicenced" so that virtually anyone can set up their own wireless network - and everyone is.
As you write, practically every coffee shop offers Wi-Fi where customers can bring their laptops and connect to the internet through an access point on the premisis.
Typical range of a Wi-Fi access-point is from 45 m (150 ft) indoors and 90 m (300 ft) outdoors.
Back to the "pulse":
Wi-Fi communication is not as precisely "scheduled" as for example GSM or 3G where the basestations emit constant and precise beacon signals for handsets to synchronize to.
Instead you could explain Wi-Fi communication as a "can I speak now?" protocol where each laptop listens to the same frequency for breaks in the transmission, requests permission to transmit and then awaits an "OK" signal from the access-point.
This leads to alot of pulsing in the signal as there will always be a mandatory waiting period from the point one laptop stops transmitting to the point where the next laptop requests to transmit.

It is well known that pulsed microwaves have a significant biological impact on all things living but the wireless industry and regulatory government agencies flat out deny the existence of any health related problem with microwaves other than of thermal nature. They deny despite all the scientific research that show that biological effects occur at signal levels far below guidelines.

Electrosensitive people report problems with DECT cordless phones that have similar transmission power and range as Wi-Fi devices. Personally, I get a "stressed" feeling being near DECT basestations, even though at first I am unawhere that they are near (behind walls etc.).

regards
- Henrik

Anonymous
# Posted: 26 Feb 2006 21:36
Reply 


Thanks for that informative reply, Henrik.

emilio
# Posted: 1 Mar 2006 10:32
Reply 


Schools with Wifi.

Does anybody know any school where fathers/mothers fought (and won) against the pc-wifi-net installed?

We are planning to fight too, and we want experience.

mail: molinodehydra#hotmail.com

Starmail
# Posted: 2 Mar 2006 14:50
Reply 


WLAN, DECT in Schools and Kindergardens
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1579030/

Nicola
# Posted: 4 Mar 2006 23:21
Reply 


Hi
Although the power of WiFi is lower because the range is less than a mast, the intensity in a room or nearby room will be as high if not higher than from a phone mast outside the house. It is a phone mast in all but name. The radiation intensity will often be 1v/m to 2.5 v/m near the transmitters or access points which are positioned in the room and also inside the laptop.

DECT levels are the same. A typical phone mast signal strength will range from 0.5 v/m to 2 v/m but will not usually be higher than this. The guidelines admit for levels of 61 v/m for frequencies over 2 GHz. However the systems never reach these levels as they don't need to to operate.

I know of an adult with leukaemia. He does not live near a phone mast but has DECT and WLAN in his house.
I thought about it the other day and ALL the people I personally know who have cancer in their 30's and 40's have either DECT and/or WLAN. I know this is not stitistically significant but no one seems to be putting 2 and 2 together.

Cancer clusters form around a phone mast after 8 years exposure. One would thus expect a high chance of getting cancer from WLAN and DECT after 8 years if not sooner.

All the research papers on microwave radiaiton apply equally to all these systems.

Nicola
# Posted: 4 Mar 2006 23:36
Reply 


Hi
Although the power of WiFi is lower because the range is less than a mast, the intensity in a room or nearby room will be as high if not higher than from a phone mast outside the house. It is a phone mast in all but name. The radiation intensity will often be 1v/m to 2.5 v/m near the transmitters or access points which are positioned in the room and also inside the laptop.

DECT levels are the same. A typical phone mast signal strength will range from 0.5 v/m to 2 v/m but will not usually be higher than this. The guidelines admit for levels of 61 v/m for frequencies over 2 GHz. However the systems never reach these levels as they don't need to to operate.

I know of an adult with leukaemia. He does not live near a phone mast but has DECT and WLAN in his house.
I thought about it the other day and ALL the people I personally know who have cancer in their 30's and 40's have either DECT and/or WLAN. I know this is not stitistically significant but no one seems to be putting 2 and 2 together.

Cancer clusters form around a phone mast after 8 years exposure. One would thus expect a high chance of getting cancer from WLAN and DECT after 8 years if not sooner.

All the research papers on microwave radiaiton apply equally to all these systems.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 6 Mar 2006 11:12
Reply 


Hi Nicola,

You are right about the signal power levels and from what I've read I agree with you on the cancer question.
There is one significant difference between WiFi transmitters and cellphone masts:
WiFi transmitters and access points only transmit bursts of signal when they need to relay data.
Cellphone masts (GSM & 3G) transmit constant synchronisation signals (or beacons) even though no calls are taking place.
An idle WiFi transmitter is radio-silent.
This is not a health protection design feature - it is meant to conserve battery power.

WiFi is not only a health risk, it's also a data-security nightmare. Un-encrypted wireless networks are wide open for anyone with a laptop.

On a sidenote, it's interresting to note that every industry that is in a frantic hurry to generate quick profit (like the software and wireless businesses) alway skip the security thinking until forced to deal with it. Corporations can act collectively like deadly wild animals and especially within the marketing departments there exists a kind of "corporate schizofrenia" where people use a special language to help forget the fact that there are real people behind the sales figures and statistics - and at the same time tell you that "they don't wish to harm anyone" and "they are human too". But as part of the corporation hive-mind they can act crazy.

I have dismantled the WiFi transmitter from my own laptop. Fotunatly it was placed behind a easily accessible plate on the bottom of my laptop.

Anonymous
# Posted: 7 Mar 2006 01:39
Reply 


Thank you all for this valuable information and discussion!

I've posted a link to this material on the Wireless Action Network of New Mexico (USA) blog.

http://wireless-action.blogspot.com/

Anyone in New Mexico, USA, will want to know about this blog and also about our Yahoo Forum:

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/wireless-action/

WAN-NM volunteer

Nicola
# Posted: 9 Mar 2006 23:06
Reply 


Hi
According to powerwatch there are signals being transmitted all the time even when the system is not in operation but is turned on.
The master node continuously transmits a control burst every 625 micro sec (giving a pulse rate of 1600 Hz). When lots of data is being transfered this drops to 320Hz.
I have measurd the pulsed signal with an ACOM metre and it is definately always on even when the laptops are not!
The more laptops are in use at once the higher the levels of radiation. So both the access nodes and the cards in the laptops transmit and receive radiation 24/7.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 13 Mar 2006 10:48
Reply 


Hi Nicola,
Hmmm, somehow I missed that 1600Hz control-pulse in the WiFi specs.
Can you provide a link to the powerwatch material you reference then I'll look at it and go over the WiFi specs again.
Thanks!
- Henrik

Anonymous
# Posted: 25 Mar 2006 22:01
Reply 


An excellent source of information on WiFi and health is ...

http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?cat=29 .

DON'T MISS IT!

Anonymous
# Posted: 31 Mar 2006 23:11
Reply 


A nother source is:

[url=http://test1.contenttest.net/Frequenzplan_en.shtml][/url]

Its a cool tabel with lots of frequencys shown. As you can see WLan at 5.470MHz can have up to 1W power!

Anonymous
# Posted: 31 Mar 2006 23:12
Reply 


A nother source is:

url=http://test1.contenttest.net/Frequenzplan_en.shtml /url

Its a cool tabel with lots of frequencys shown. As you can see WLan at 5.470MHz can have up to 1W power!

Anonymous
# Posted: 31 Mar 2006 23:13
Reply 


A nother source is:

http://test1.contenttest.net/Frequenzplan_en.shtml

Its a cool tabel with lots of frequencys shown. As you can see WLan at 5.470MHz can have up to 1W power!

Hope i get the URL working now...

nicola
# Posted: 2 Apr 2006 02:24
Reply 


Hi
I got the paper from Powerwatch. I think you may have to pay to get it. It doesn't sem to be freely available on their site. I'm sure however they could send you a copy or confirm over the phone if you rang them.

When you hear the radiaiton emitted from a WLAN on the ACOM, it sounds like a machine gun! Definately pulsing!

agnes
# Posted: 3 Apr 2006 04:48
Reply 


Hi Nicola.
I am Henriks mom, Agnes.
Henrik lives in Copenhagen, I live in the Malvern Hills, in Herefordshire, so I will phone Alistair Philips, Powerwatch, and ask him, and I have his recording of the different device´s sounds, and I do agrre with you, it sounds like a machine gun.

But anyway, I will ask Powerwatch to put it in writing so we can publish it here in Forum.
Best regards.
Agnes Ingvarsdottir.
Glen Lea. Upper Colwall. Nr. Malvern.
WR13 6DH.
Phone/fax: 01684 540 138
e-mail: agnes@mast-victims.org

Anonymous
# Posted: 3 Apr 2006 20:29
Reply 


This may be of interest:

http://interface.blog.com/512129/

http://www.uncoy.com/2006/03/safety_issues_w.html

Anonymous
# Posted: 3 Apr 2006 23:07
Reply 


excerpted from [Publib], a public library discussion board

~ opposition to wireless access ~

"The Santa Fe Public Library's Board has asked the Library to explore adding wireless to its services at its locations.

But now a local group of people have raised questions of potential health
issues and oppose WiFi in public libraries.

The City itself is proceeding towards creating wireless zones in some parts of the downtown area. The people opposing wireless access in the library want us to be a refuge, so to speak, from what they know is really
everywhere else.

They have a blog, Wireless Action Network,
NM http://wireless-action.blogspot.com/

We would like to hear about any other libraries, especially public
libraries, who have encountered resistance to wireless access in the library.

Thank you for your assistance."

Miriam Bobkoff personal: mbobkoff at cybermesa.com
Santa Fe Public Library work: mkbobkoff at ci.santa-fe.nm.us
145 Washington Avenue
Santa Fe, NM 87501 The Library's Page:
(505) 955-6832 http://www.santafelibrary.org
Icarus... the SFPL Blog http://santafelibrary.blogspot.com


from:

http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/2006-March/097209.html

Anonymous
# Posted: 3 Apr 2006 23:29
Reply 


WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY
[from: http://www.berkeleydaily.org/text/article.cfm?issue=02-25-05&storyID=2 0817]

Editors, Daily Planet:

Thanks to Doug Loranger for his letter in Feb. 18-21 Daily Planet, regarding the radiation from RFID devices. This is a fact that people should certainly know: Wireless devices and radio frequency radiation are bad for health. However, wireless providers never let this fact reach the public. The Telecommunication Act of 1996 forbids the public to use health risks of wireless sources to stop wireless facilities. The public should be blamed too, for it welcomes wireless devices, such as cell phones, base station antennas, WI-FI systems. For instance, you see how much people are addicted to their cell phones, or how they jam pack coffee shops where there are WI-FI connections to the Internet. Go to any coffee shop in Berkeley to see the place has become like a computer lab; almost everyone is at a lap-top. On the campus of UC Berkeley, there are more than 400 WI-FI antennas in every library, on every floor of buildings, and other locations, which provide wireless connection to the Internet. They call this system the AirBears. Users on campus rush to use the AirBears without paying any attention that they are under constant radiation. Also, hundreds or thousands of base-station antennas are installed in cities to provide connection to cell phones.

There are surely health hazards due to radio frequency radiation as reported in hundreds of scientific documents. For instance, in the December issue of the Spectrum Magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), there is a report that links cell phones to Acoustic Neuroma tumor in the brain. According to this report, people who use cell phones for more than 10 years have a good chance to develop the tumor. The report estimates that by the year 2017, 200 million Americans have used cell phones for more than 10 years. Are little cell phones becoming the weapons of mass destruction? Also, there was a study in Spain in 2003 that shows those who live close to wireless base station antennas suffer from certain diseases.

The sad part of the wireless technology is that choice has been eroded. If you see someone is smoking a cigarette, you can choose to stay away from the smoker. However, you cannot exempt yourself from the radio frequency radiation by not using a cell phone or a wireless lap-top computer. The radiation is there no matter what. Anywhere you go you are bombarded by the radiation 24/7. Also, those who had hoped to fight wireless corporations cannot do any longer. Mr. George W. Bush signed a law on Feb. 18 according to which we the people cannot file class action lawsuits against corporations.

Afrida Freeman

[from: http://www.berkeleydaily.org/text/article.cfm?issue=02-25-05&storyID=2 0817]

Anonymous
# Posted: 4 Apr 2006 22:50
Reply 


Wireless Action Network of New Mexico's blog has
selected Rebekah Azen's April guest editorial -- in
the Sun Monthly -- on Santa Fe's Public Library and
the WiFi question as its Discussion Topic of the
Month.

http://wireless-action.blogspot.com/2006/04/discussion-topic-of-month- for-april.html

Anonymous
# Posted: 8 Apr 2006 21:56
Reply 


Health Dangers From Wireless Laptops

http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1755556/

Anonymous
# Posted: 15 Apr 2006 20:51
Reply 


Don't worry Toronto: WI-FI won't kill you?
http://omega-news.livejournal.com/213369.html

Anonymous
# Posted: 19 May 2006 23:50
Reply 


For the sake of clarity how about being a little more specific.
WiFi is a catch all term for IEEE 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g and the still being specified 802.11n

Just to be more complete other standards in use are:

WiMax, IEEE 802.16, A range of different frequencies and power levels.

Bluetooth, IEEE 802.15.1, also 2.40-2.48GHz but lower power than 802.11b.

ZigBee, IEEE 802.15.4, similar power and frequency as bluetooth.

Anonymous
# Posted: 2 Oct 2006 15:51
Reply 


Hello,

normally WioFi is pulsed with 10 Hz.

Many sounds of high frequency sources can be heard at:

http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina109.html

I have posted there many sounds in MP3 format.

Charles Claessens
www.milieuziektes.nl

Starting at Pagina100 most pages are in english!

Klara Zetkin
# Posted: 12 Oct 2006 00:35
Reply 


Let it be, let it be... What a strange place here.

Serj Olivakl
# Posted: 13 Oct 2006 21:32
Reply 


You have a great site!

Genrih Brosass
# Posted: 17 Oct 2006 00:50
Reply 


Hello!
Cool site!

Dulsinea Toboss
# Posted: 22 Oct 2006 08:29
Reply 


I'm in trouble, help me...

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 24 Oct 2006 19:03
Reply 


Dear Dulsinea Toboss,

How can we help you? What kind of trouble ?

. 1 . 2 . 3 . >>
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Underlined Style  Image Link  URL Link 

» Username  » Password 
You can post anonymously by entering a nickname with no password (if that nickname has not been taken by another member) or by leaving both fields empty. If you have an account you can also log in from this page without posting a message.
 

These forums are running on online community software miniBB™ © 2001-2017