Panorama's "Wireless in schools" Program 8:30 Tonight

[ptaylor]

Ah ok.

 

That fruitcake of a lady would currently get referred to a psychiatrist (for psychosis?) by a UK doctor but in Sweden electrosensitivity is an officially recognised condition.

 

However apparently The Health Protection Agency has concluded that it is real so I think we'll be following Sweden's lead.

[mattx]

n Sweden electrosensitivity is an officially recognised condition.

 

Well, let he go and live in Sweden then if she is that bovvvvered.

 

The Health Protection Agency has concluded that it is real so I think we'll be following Sweden's lead.

 

Source ? [ If possible ] - Thanks.

[ptaylor]

http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/publications/hpa_rpd_reports/2005/hpa_rpd_010.pdf

[mattx]

Just checking the HPA website and I notice this:

 

Health concerns and HPA advice

 

There is no evidence to date that exposure to the RF signals from WiFi and WLANs adversely affect the health of the general population.

 

Conclusion

 

On the basis of current scientific information WiFi equipment satisfies international guidelines. There is no consistent evidence of health effects from RF exposures below guideline levels and therefore no reason why schools and others should not use WiFi equipment .

 

http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/understand/radiation_topics/emf/wifi.htm

 

Was the source.

[ptaylor]

I'm not sure if people who think they have electrosensitivity believe that wifi causes them problems but this link i posted before about evidence of biological effects certainly applies to wifi so would seem to contradict that quote about evidence from the hpa site.

 

http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/goldsworthy_bio_weak_em_07.pdf

[enjay]

this link i posted ... would seem to contradict that quote about evidence from the hpa site.

Not necessarily true - the HPA's site says "the health of the general population", and since a very small number of people are affected by ES (2% according to Panorama), they might not constitute general public, as 98% are indeed unaffected.

 

You have hit the crux of the problem though - there is a lot of contradictory data out there, so depending on who you listen to, what their pre-dispositions are and which countries guidelines and definitions they are following, you could draw dramatically different conclusions.

 

We clearly need to wait until there is more research on this to draw from, however what do we do in the meantime? Do we carry on regardless or take precautionary measures which may subsequently turn out to have been unnecessary?

 

Also, do we just follow the advice of our own Government / the HPA, or should we also follow what other countries decide based on their research and their different guidelines and safety standards?

[culkein]

Don't you think the common ground we have here is that most of us are in agreement that there's more to this than we know about and that further testing is needed? If so then why are educationalists so desperate to have it installed everywhere? We've been trying to fend WiFi off with a pointy stick for some time but the pressure is relentless.

 

Personally I've always been a bit weird around electrical objects and mobile phones though I haven't noticed any problems with my home WiFi. However, putting it in schools is another thing altogether. It's never been that great anyway (speed, reliability) and lets face it, it's a cop-out instead of spending what should be spent on proper learning environments with hard wiring and adequate desking.

[mattx]

Don't you think the common ground we have here is that most of us are in agreement that there's more to this than we know about and that further testing is needed?

 

Errrrrrr no. It sounds like you have been sucked into to all the media hype... ;-)

[eean]

This is apparently being brought up at tonight's governer's meeting and I've got to go :?

I haven't had a chance to follow up the links on here (and I will after school) but if anyone has any other good sources of information about this so I can quickly clue my self up I'd appreciate it.

 

As part of my degree, I remember learning about similar dubious evidence about the effect of power lines and electricity sub stations. Is there even some dodgy research about florecent lighting? I would quite like some thing to help put all this into prospective (something panaroma didn't).

[CyberNerd]

Is there even some dodgy research about florecent lighting?

 

didn't that turn out to be true, hence lighting standards in computer rooms etc?

 

As far as evidence for the WiFi thing - just look at the references for some of the reviews (there is a link earlier in the thread). To me the references are not good - nothing refering to papers in Science, Nature, the Lancet etc (top scientific journals). The paper references some quite obscure journals instead. It's hardly a mountain of evidence, and I'm sure that paper wasn't peer reviewed either.

Also check the slashdot postings (geoff linked), there are a handfull of useful scientific posts.

[enjay]

@Eean: The HPA's website would be a good place to look - they are one of the organisations quoted in this thread (interestingly, disagreeing with the views expressed by their Chairman in Panorama!) and have also done research into the effects of power lines and all sorts of other similar things (including the harmful effects of Cornwall!).

 

Try also the "related links" bit of the BBC articles.