Ok, people asked for a survey ... you have a survey.
Ok, people asked for a survey ... you have a survey.
Just wondered but i remember that panorama stated that the safety levels are based on Thermal interaction and nothing else but what else could they set the levels to? I dont think it actually stated what else it could set levels to.
You're misunderstanding.Originally Posted by NickJones
I wasn't giving examples of 'safe' items - only things we constantly use and which aren't guaranteed 100% safe. My point was that you can't prove anything is harmless.
We accept the hazards that may come with these products ( or future hazards) because of the utility they give us now. This has always been the case.
No, I have no commercial interests in WiFi. I am not resolutely defending it no matter what, simply defending it against poorly-researched sensationalist journalism. Give me something even vaguely concrete on it, and I will act according; give me a laughable "documentary" and I'll laugh at it.Originally Posted by Skoggmeiger
Ah, but how much of that is definitively the WiFi and not other ambient radiation levels from your laptop or any other electrical devices in the room, or indeed other factors such as eye-strain from staring at the screen, poor lighting in your room, incorrect seating position, the mobile on the desk next to you, etc etc etc.Originally Posted by Skoggmeiger
Try turning off the WiFi (access point and laptop) and see if you feel any different. Then and only then would you have anything to go on, and even that would just be one person's opinion and not any quality research.
I dont think the programme did itself any favours by showing the person who experienced radiation sickness (now known as BacoFoil Woman) but i'm amazed by the number of folk who are 100% ignoring the fact that there may be something in it - and I stress the words "may" and "something"
I'm a huge fan of Wifi - dont get me wrong, but it is a relatively new technology / science and we have no way (at the moment) of knowing the long term effects.
Being the shortsighted ICT geek that I am, people often ask why I dont have laser correction when thousands say how great it is. The simple answer I give is that we need to see the long term effects after a generation of people have been and gone. Who's to say that in 40 years time the people who have had laser surgery simply go blind- we simply dont know.
The same reasoning needs to apply here - there is obviously heavy research going into this bourne of concern for the health of everyone. If you want to ignore it then its your choice.
I don't think anyone is ignoring that there 'may' be 'something' wrong with it - it is either like me, they don't really care, or they may just be laughing at the show whilst acknowledging that there may be something...Originally Posted by cheesypete
The general concensus here seems to be that;
Yes - If there is a possibility of a problem then lets have it studied and the findings published by reputable researchers.
No - Don't broadcast biased trivia with no real evidence to back up the claims being made.
The program last night just had the same effect as me running through a busy shopping centre on a Saturday afternoon shouting 'Fire Fire' because someone lit a match outside!
A good collation of information from various sources is available from Ewan McIntosh's blog.
I dont really think any of us are 'ignoring' that there maybe something wrong but at this state its almost like saying something as vague as you may get knocked over by a bus at some point in the future.Originally Posted by cheesypete
I like others do think its worth looking into though.
For sale: Sony Ericsson HBH 600 Bluetooth headset:
One careful owner, inability to think for myself forces prompt sale.
I wrongly presumed you would have fathomed that I didn't feel like sh*t, when Wi-Fi was turned off.Originally Posted by NickJones
One again, I'm not asking for Wi-Fi to be banned, I merely believe further testing needs to be done, but some of you on here, especially yourself, ignorantly disregard an opposing opinion on the debate.
A small mole may only be a small mole, but leave it too long and it might become a melanoma.
That reminds me of the saying "A wise man learns from his own mistakes, but a really wise man learns from the mistakes of others".Originally Posted by cheesypete
Have we learnt from the mistake our ancestors made with smoking etc? I'm sorry to go so much against the crowd here, but the conversation that is taking place here strikes me as something that would have happened if I went back in time to around 1850 and told them smoking tabacco wasn't good for your health. Do you think they'd have mocked me and laughed at me? Of course they would.
That said, I've stated in a previous post that there is not a lot we can do about it. In answer to my own question above, of course we haven't learnt from the mistakes our anscestors made. We rarely do. That's just human nature. It's too late now... we have implemented this technology with little research into it's long term effects and trying to stop it now would be like trying to stop the world using cars.
As I was busily doing something else last night, I missed this program....however I could have sworn that I just heard people talking about a woman wrapped in bacofoil and figured I would come over and have a look
Erm, do I dare ask what you were doing last night? Have you managed to work out the exact GPS coordinates of WITCH yet, who happened to be moving into your county? Hehe.Originally Posted by Jake
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)