Thursday, August 19, 2010

Consumer Devices and Electomagnetic Radiation

Today I'm a little frustrated by more then a few negative mentions of the Ontario parents who are pressuring their school district to discontinue the use of WiFi. Theres nothing particularly new going on, some local community's across the world have been fighting the deployment of cell phone towers and even wired published a piece about the effects of WiFi in 2006

Everyones entitled to their opinion, however I find the "WiFi is awesome, these parents are nuts" groupthink a little disturbing. Considering the combined knowledge across various hacker communities I'm somewhat disappointed by the lack of serious consideration.

First and foremost, I'd like to see WiFi, Cellphones, Microwaves, and other specific RF implementations dropped from these debates. I think the real question on the table is: What affect (if any) does the electromagnetic radiation being produced by prolific consumer devices have on the human body

America's FCC FAQ states:
At relatively low levels of exposure to RF radiation, i.e., levels lower than those that would produce significant heating; the evidence for production of harmful biological effects is ambiguous and unproven. Such effects, if they exist, have been referred to as "non-thermal" effects. A number of reports have appeared in the scientific literature describing the observation of a range of biological effects resulting from exposure to low-levels of RF energy. However, in most cases, further experimental research has been unable to reproduce these effects. Furthermore, since much of the research is not done on whole bodies (in vivo), there has been no determination that such effects constitute a human health hazard. It is generally agreed that further research is needed to determine the generality of such effects and their possible relevance, if any, to human health.


I think thats a fair response considering the current state of research in this space, however if we remove the political slant and legal ease we're left with "Maybe, we're not sure at this time".

In this particular case it may be in the Ontario school districts best interest, to review any records of the school nurse keeps to determine patterns. A good test would be to compare the number of reported symptoms to those of previous years and investigate the possibility that the children may be inadvertently being rewarded for reporting these symptoms (ie. going home early, getting out of gym, or class).

At the same time its common knowledge that RF causes interference to electrical devices. Considering our nervous system is also an electrical system, I think its foolish to completely discount the reported symptoms as unrelated.

If the brain was receiving unfiltered mild electrical interference, headaches and nausea would reasonable symptoms. In that case, there are probably no real long term health effects. However we also need to consider the effect electrical interference could potentially have on the developing brain. Obviously all of this is speculative, but I see real value in seeing this research come to pass. Comparing WiFi and cellular rollouts in epidemiology studies, and double blind testing inside a Faraday cage could help.

All in all, society has every right to be suspicious of the proliferation of wireless networks. Theres nothing wrong with the intuitive wisdom that rejects things that are too good to be true, because history has shown that every technological advancement comes with its price.

--Multi-Mode