- Forums - Sign Up - Reply - Search - Statistics -
www.mast-victims.org forum / Health / Adverse affects from the Roku remote
Author Message
markoff
Member
# Posted: 13 Apr 2015 11:53
Reply 


Hello Everyone,

Since I acquired my Acoustimeter I've acquired some information about what has been causing some of my symptoms. I have the usual group of problems people here have associated with rf/microwave sensitivity (tinitus, insomnia, etc...).

One thing I was surprised to find was that the remote control for the Roku device was a tremendous source of emissions under various circumstances. I'm still trying to figure it out because for a minute or two the device did not seem to be putting out much radiation, then all of a sudden it switched on putting out some extremely high levels of rf/microwave radiation.

(FYI, people who have other kinds of meters may get contradictory results though because of the nature of the Roku remote. It works in a similar fashion to smart meters. It transmits for miniscule pieces of time but very intensely. So if your rf/microwave sensor displays levels that are averaged over a period of time then it may not give any indication of a problem I've found with the Roku remote.)

While the average level displayed was not too alarming, the Acoustimeter also displays the levels at a particular instant and it displays the maximum radiation levels for that session. The average levels with the Roku remote right next to the sensor were between 300-500 microwatts/meter squared which I think is unhealthy already but what scares me is the session maximum had done the digital equivalent of burying the needle. I did not know until testing the Roku remote tonight that the maximum level of radiation it could measure was 6.0 V/m because that was what came out of the Roku remote within the first few minutes it had batteries in it.

To be reasonable I need to say that if I moved the Roku remote away from the sensor the levels dropped VERY QUICKLY, but I wanted to bring it up here anyway because I'm sure I'm not the only person who watched movies with the Roku remote lying on my chest or next to me on my bed.

I also need to say that taking the batteries out of the Roku remote is also not a good idea. I don't know how long it takes but I have confirmed that after a while with no batteries in the Roku remote the Roku base station itself ramps up it's transmission strength to ridiculous levels. I don't know how long it takes for it to start doing this but after it starts the average transmission level displayed on the Acoustimeter was around 6000 microwatts/meter squared and that was with my sensor 2 feet from the Roku device. The recorded levels would of course become much higher if I had chosen to approach the Roku device with my sensor. Keep in mind that I'm now talking about the AVERAGE transmission levels, not the peek and not the transmission levels for an instant. When it's in this mode the high radiation level is constant. I hypothesized that the Roku base station was reaching out trying to contact the Roku remote, when it lost touch for a period of time it amplified it's transmissions to the maximum levels trying to restore the connection. I believe that I was proven right after I found that the Roku base station transmission levels went back down to it's normal levels after I plugged the batteries back in to the Roku remote.

So, the lesson I took from this experience is go ahead and take the batteries out of the remote if you want but if you do make sure to unplug the power cord for the Roku device itself so it can't go into that "searching for the remote" mode.

Has anybody else noticed a problem with their Roku device and remote? In my opinion the manufacturer has made a hazardous device and given the public NO warning about it whatsoever. They could have made the remote connect to the base station via infrared transmission without harming the health of anybody. The only difference is the remote would have to have a line of sight with the Roku device in order to work. That would be a small price to pay for me not to have to deal with this problem anymore. I'd throw the Roku device out but my girlfriend loves it and it's her apartment and her device. Certainly she gets to say what should be done with it and I haven't even suggested making a change. I'm hoping if I bring the problems with the device to light perhaps the company selling the Roku device might come to realize the wisdom of putting out a new version that uses a remote controller that connects using infrared. As it is now IMHO the device puts out an obscene amount of radiation in fulfilling what is a very low bandwidth purpose. It shouldn't generate so much rf/microwave noise simply to convey to the base station which button you are pressing and for how long and it does so regardless of whether you are pressing buttons on the remote or not.

Most Sincerely,

markoff

alasdairp
Member
# Posted: 13 Apr 2015 17:26 - Edited by: alasdairp
Reply 


You must have a Roku 3 with the headset connection.
I assume the actual Roku box IS connected by cable and not by WiFi?
If it streams by WiFi then you will have very high levels of RF for HDTV bandwidth from that and your router as well as the remote.

The remote is also a "gaming" remote with motion sensors, so that is probably having ongoing complex conversations with the Roku box. WiFi is bad for remotes as WiFi devices are designed to keep synchronised - unlike infra-red which start and stop when you push the buttons.
Maybe get an earlier Roku 2 without the enhanced controller remote?

If you use the headset, then you should get a UHF/microwave split ferrite and wind a few turns of the headset cable through it to stop the microwaves travelling up the headphone cable and directly into your ears. Check wthat the RF levels at the earbuds/headset are.

All WiFi is terrible for EHS sensitive people. Really bad news. Make sure all WiFi is powered off at night if you want to reduce your insomnia and night-time tinnitus.

agnes
# Posted: 14 Apr 2015 01:27
Reply 


Thank you Markoff and Alasdair.
Both are really important info for MV Forum users.
All the best
Agnes

ES
# Posted: 14 Apr 2015 17:08
Reply 


Thank you Markoff and Alasdair for you contributions to the forum .
An EHS contact tells me that his Telecoms neighbour had this device.It caused him lots of health problems [ headaches + other symptoms] .
He could not stand it .i cannot stand Wifi either.

markoff
Member
# Posted: 15 Apr 2015 11:27
Reply 


Thank you alasdairp for the information. We are definitely not using the Roku with a headset. I can confirm that the Roku box is connected by a cable. We haven't had a wifi router since I figured out the way my body was reacting to microwaves. At the time we were not aware that the Roku remote connected to the box via wifi although it's obvious that that was the case once we thought about it, otherwise we would have had to have a clear line of site from the remote to the roku box in order for the remote to work. She we should have known but it just didn't occur to us. In any case by the time the obvious became known to us (that the device connected to the remote over wifi) what really surprised us was not that it used wifi but how powerfully the remote and roku box were capable of transmitting. I haven't had a wifi router to check the levels on since I acquired my acoustimeter but I have had the opportunity to test the levels coming from the routers in our neighbors apartment and I don't think that router's signal is anywhere near as powerful as the maximum signal strength put out by either the Roku box or the roku remote. This was the real surprise because my assumption was that the connection between the device and the remote would not require much bandwidth at all. From what you have told me though perhaps that assumption was wrong. You mentioned that the roku remote is used as a gaming controller for some of the games the roku comes with and that i did not know. Certainly that goes some way to explaining the need for a wifi connection between the roku box and the remote.

Thanks once again alasdairp.

Bill
# Posted: 24 Oct 2018 22:43
Reply 


Sorry to ressurrect an old post but if I bought an IR universal remote for the Roku Ultra, do you think the base station would continue to search for the original Roku WIFI Direct remote or just "give up" eventually?

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 25 Oct 2018 11:50
Reply 


Bill,

"Sorry to ressurrect an old post but if I bought an IR universal remote for the Roku Ultra, do you think the base station would continue to search for the original Roku WIFI Direct remote or just "give up" eventually?"

I have no direct knowledge of the Roku device, but if the base-station is functioning as a standard WiFi access point, then the WiFi remote would search for the base-station instead. So if you switch off the old remote, then it should'nt be an issue.

Be aware though, that WiFi access points are continuously transmitting pulses of microwave radiation as long as they are switched on. This pulse serves to partly allow devices and peripherals to sense and connect to the WiFi access point and partly to time-coordinate transmissions between seperate connected devices. Read also the post by alasdairp above.

HFanalyzerGuy
# Posted: 8 Dec 2018 18:49
Reply 


The Roku 2 is the only one that you can use safely, if correctly setup it emits no radiation,best is the 2015 upgraded model,its faster. Look in the battery compartment,if no paring buttons it is a infared remote,thats safe,you have to point it for it to work. You need a ethernet connection(ethernet is at least twice as fast) and must follow these steps to disable the wifi and its ping as it searches for phones apps in wifi even w a hardwire ethernet connected. (it emits harmfull levels of RF often) Go to setting,advanced, disable "control using mobile apps" also no screen mirroring. None of this will take effect untill you unplug the roku for 45 seconds thou.

HFanalyzerGuy
# Posted: 8 Dec 2018 19:12
Reply 


Any roku w wifi remote is bad, I noticed the remote fires up its internal wifi ,pegging my meter, by just touching it or if it rocks on the table. The closer you are the worse it is, at 20 feet its completely safe. So it emits over 2,000 microwatts within a foot and it goes down to safe level at 20 feet. Safe is less than 6 according to the SBM-2015 code. Its building biology evaluation guidelines for RF radiation,and mold,asbestos ect. Be aware of smart meters,cell phones, cell towers and much worse is the coming 5G, it disrupts oxygen causing many different illnesses. Even if you cant feel it, it makes your blood cells look like bottle caps in a microscope,disrupts sleep, nothing good about certain rf frequencies

DEE
# Posted: 9 Dec 2018 21:26
Reply 


A wireless mouse also emits high levels of RF. It seems so pointless to me as it is just as easy to plug in a mouse, but many people would not have an RF meter and they would not notice their symptoms getting worse.
A friend with a wired computer has a wireless mouse and I cannot use her computer as I get bad headaches there. So much wireless junk, you just can't get away from it.

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 light forum script miniBB™ © 2001-2018