You are a wifi-paranoid whack job

To the anonymous user with the annoyingly long post about the dangers of microwaves, cell phones, and now wifi, I have but one thing to say. You are a paranoid whack job.

I have had a WiFi network in my home since they came out, worked in buildings with permanent WiFi emplacements, used cell phones all day (even keep mine within about two feet at all times, and yes its on), and uh-oh I even stand next to the microwave. Last Air Force physical? Perfect health.

I don't care what these energies will do to my body in a hundred years because by then, it'll probably be better off cooked. In the short term (or long term, considering how much we're all around the radiation noise of modern society) it has little bearing. Anyone who thinks they're suffering from such afflictions has only one problem, mental illness.

Regards,
Sabre

Subject: David Hanrahan

Hi Nick

I appreciate you are trying to satirise the whole Windows Vista/Office 2007 thing, but it is very unfair for you to misrepresent David Hanrahan's views from the SMH article. None of that stuff, apart from saying there is upgrade interest from our corporate customers, was said by Dave.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35999 I'd appreciate a clarification.

kind regards

Martin

We have apologised to David for erroneously attributing to him comments made another analyst. The story has since been edited to correct this - INQ Newsdesk µ

Subject: LCD sales soar as cathode ray tubes slump

MARIE CURIE was a very smart person, she did not however discover cathode rays. The people who developed the basis for the modern cathode ray tube include William Crookes, Karl Ferdinand Braun, Heinrich Geissler, Philipp von Lenard and J. J. Thomson.

A simple overview can be found at
http://members.chello.nl/~h.dijkstra19/page7.html

Come on people - you are a technology site - a little basic research should not be too hard...

Regards,

Tim

Subject: The dangers of ISM band radiation

Hello, I hope that you agree with the comments I have made below about the letter recently published on theinquirer.net about the dangers of ISM band radiation. I have not disagreed with the point of view per se, as I think the subject is worthy of serious further investigation, but I believe that the arguments used are flawed and without suitable evidence to back them up and that "anonymous" lacks a basic understanding of some of the basic principles involved.

While this subject might merely be amusing to some, microwaves do not affect tissue by mere EM electromagnetic effects as from say 50-60Hz powerlines.

"That will be those funny 'Electromagnetic electromagnetic effects' then? By definition, the effects of microwaves are due to electromagnetic interactions with the material that absorbs them. This interaction changes with the frequency because the coupling mode changes with frequency e.g. microwaves - rotational excitation of molecule/ infrared - vibrational excitation of molecules. The result is exactly the same; heating."

The mechanisms of physiological and DNA / possible cancer effects from Ghz Microwave frequency RF, are vastly different compared to 60Hz powerline radiation, due to the fundamental difference in depth of power absorption with the GhZ - gigahertz frequencies of the following MICROWAVE RF sources -

"60Hz EM radiation couples very poorly with non-conducting materials, leading to different physical effects with a system that is primarily composed of insulating materials and dielectrics - the human body."

1] CELL PHONES (with service dependent duty cycles - with PCS the safest due to lowest RF duty cycles, analog services the worst and typical current digital non-PCS services still nearly as dangerous as analog cell service ). The anecdotal evidence is that primary routes of cancer from cell phone Microwave RF emission is in the ear, where tumors are barely noticeable, and thereafter formation of severe and deadly brain tumors in susceptible cases.

"Anecdotal evidence, without supporting scientific evidence, is no basis for an argument. Also is this referring to microwave or radio frequency radiation? As has just been pointed out they have different effects."

The fragile thin structures of the ear are most easily damaged by Microwaves exposure from cell phones, and if the shape of the ear canal is just "right" in an individual, the likelihood that one contracts cancer from extended cell use without a headset is not negligible over time.

"What is 'right'? Show me the study that demonstrates that the physiology of someone's ear canal affects the absorption of microwave radiation. I believe the assumption is being made that the ear canal would act as a waveguide, which would require the skin to be microwave reflecting, or made of metal."

The first point for safety is use a headset, as this dramatically reduces one's risk for deadly brain tumors. The second point is do not leave the cell on when placed in direct contact to the body (ie in a holster) as while the risk is lower than for ear/brain cancers, it is still not odds in favor of your long term health for day in day out wearing the idle powered on cell next to your body. And in the case of men, don't use a headset and place the damm cell in your crotch as yes the second area sensitive for Microwave induced cancers are one's "jewels".

"Since the link between ear cancer and microwave radiation has not yet been proven, I don't know how we are at the stage of knowing the second most likely site for cancer due to microwave radiation"

For those who laugh at this, it is fairly well known that MICROWAVE TELECOM tower technicians - those who maintained the telephone microwave transmitter towers (long before cell phones) had unusual incidences of testicular cancer. FACT.

"I am pretty certain that the technicians would turn off the tower before maintaining it. And if the most vulnerable area is the ear, why do they not have ear cancer? Also, correlation does not imply a common cause. Maybe the technicians all used a particular compound in their work that causes testicular cancer? Again, anecdotal evidence without a study to back it up is worthless."

Microwave interaction as grossly oversimplified by some stupid idiots, is not garden variety low frequency EM electromagnetic effects, as from say powerline 50-60HZ, not in the least.

"Those pesky EM EM effects again. And what is garden variety? The gamut of effects caused by EM radiation is huge. Why are the effects of gamma rays not garden variety? Or visible light? The mechanism of microwaves interaction with matter is well documented and all the known effects of microwave radiation can be explained by it."

A physical property of a given electromagnetic radiation is depth of penetration or skin depth, where for higher frequencies the power is adsorbed at progressively shallower depths at higher frequencies, increasing the peak power density locally.

"This means that the microwaves are less penetrating. A microwave cooker only heats the outer 1-2cm of the food, at vastly greater power."

MICROWAVES are well known to not be ionizing radiation (the purported argument of the wild eyed idiots who claim Microwaves/Cell/WiFi is [falsely] safe) BUT the goofballs (idiots) fail to realize that it is well known that MICROWAVES can trivially cause DNA damage by denaturing (damaging the structure of) DNA without IONIZING Radiation. (touche to you right wing nut jobs!) Ionizing radiation directly breaks DNA where a high energy atomic / subatomic particle crashes through the DNA and cutting it from the emitted particle of nuclear radioactive sources ( this is NOT Radio Frequency ElectroMagnetic Radiation). By contrast, NON-Ionizing MICROWAVE ElectroMagnetic radiation merely cooks the DNA selectively faster than temperature alone in the surrounding tissue exposed might otherwise - because the DNA is more susceptible to damage from MICROWAVE EXPOSURE than the rest of the cellular matter. Yes DNA is Fragile !!! (takes a pea brain to figure that one out)

"DNA is actually extraordinarily robust, we have vast numbers of repair enzymes that use the self-correcting nature of DNA (two chains = built-in backup) to make billions of repairs each second. This is the reason that cancer is actually quite rare and some people can smoke 20 cigarettes a day without getting lung cancer. In order for it to be more susceptible to microwave radiation, it would have to have a stronger inherent dipole than the surrounding cellular material, which is mostly water. As water has one of the largest molecular dipoles of any known molecule, this would be difficult."

So all those STUPID banal idiotic right wing finger pointers are wrong - MICROWAVES ARE DANGEROUS, and very much so. At least if you want to live a long time cancer free. Maybe they don't, but hey that is their stupidity. 2] WiFi - where the largest safety increase comes from, is staying further away from WiFi and cell handset antennas. IE Laptops (or some rare desktop) internal WiFi tends to place one close to the antenna and can pose considerable health risks from long term exposure, although not as bad a cell cell phone to one's ear.

"True of all electromagnetic radition, it's called the inverse square law."

For laptop use, I use a USB pen type WiFi link from Airlink101 ($10 at Frys electronics in California) or any other brand, which I attach to a 6+ foot longish USB cable to my laptop, and turn off my laptop's INTERNAL WiFi. This lets me place the actual WiFi transmitter a good 3-6ft away from me, and makes it comfortable & safer for long term use. When I used a PCMCIA laptop slot WiFi adapter I got noticeably flushed / red faced from excessive WiFi microwave power density very close to me from the PCMCIA WiFi adapter.

"Excessive? The power density 50cm away from a standard Wi-Fi adaptor is 0.00636mW/cm^2. Can you show that these effects only occur when the WiFi is switched on? In a blind test?"

The USB WiFi cable trick fixed that quickly and cheaply. But best for safety is to use WIRED ethernet by far and turn off any WiFi. And yes continual exposure to WiFi Microwaves can, as Kate Figes suffers, affect ones behavior from physiological effects of continuous exposure to MICROWAVES, without crossing the threshold to cancer necessarily. As to those who say that AC powerline 50-60hz is evidence that microwaves could not cause problems, they are idiots for ignoring the differences between the frequencies and peak adsorbed power densities and specifically frequency dependent effects on body chemistry and DNA. It takes a pea brain to figure out that there are orders of magnitiude differences between 60hz, and 1,000,000,000 hz ( Ac powerline and Microwaves - Cell, Oven and WiFi ), and those who study tissue effects know this well.

"There are in fact 8 orders of magnitude between 60 and 1,000,000,000. Any secondary school student could explain this trivial and utterly irrelevant piece of maths. The number of orders of magnitude has little bearing on this discussion as we are really discussing how an living system could have a vastly different interaction with EM radiation than is currently known."

But even approx 60Hz when pulse shaped optimally with patient coils, has demonstrated significant increases in BONE healing when done optimally by orthopedic researchers trying to speed the rate of bone fracture healing (although not commonly done this is proven to work with the correct pulses and apparatus) So EM radiation of all kinds can materially affect tissue under specific conditions.

"This is commonly know as RF Heating Therapy. Radio freqency radiation is used because microwaves do not penetrate far enough into the body to be effective. Also, in contrast to this argument, RF electromagnetic radiation is currently used as a cancer treatment."

But right wing NeoCon nutjobs, well they are mentally challenged and surely don't read academic research literature, since that is merely a vast liberal conspiracy - academic research that is. ???

"Neither apparently do you. The vast majority of research into this issue is inconclusive, which is why many people are advising caution. This is not evidence that there is a conspiracy to cover up damaging research into the effects of microwave radiation"

While some folks are disparaging of the possibility of risks from WiFi, I'd recommend to those folks to stick their heads into an operating Microwave Oven, or put their WiFi access point in their home under their pillow while they sleep every nite.

"Which would be completely unrepresentative of the levels of exposure that you receive from these devices."

Either of these suggestions will help improve the CULL of stupid pompous idiots in the world, who don't read academic research into the physiological effects of Microwaves, before opening their loud, know it all mouths.

"Hello Mr. Kettle, you're looking awfully black today"

3] MICROWAVE Ovens are dangerous if they leak, and I'd bet NO ONE tests their ovens for MICROWAVE RF leakage regularly.

"That will be Microwave leakage then, not those rare radio frequency microwaves."

Some microwave ovens are considerably worse than others, and there is no way to tell unless one tests using proper technician equipment. The power from a Microwave oven is considerably higher but the leakage tends to be directional ( angle specific ) typically from the door seals but no telling on a specific machine if there are other emission points. Simply put do not stand next to your microwave oven when cooking NEVER. Move away.

"Ever heard of Michael Faraday? He had this great thing called a Faraday Cage. An electromagnetic field cannot pass through a closed conducting cage, as long as the holes in it are smaller than the wavelength of the radiation. As the wavelength of radiation from a microwave is 12.5cm, this isn't too hard. Leakage from microwave ovens is neglible as long as the device is in good working condition. Leakage from such a high power device would be immediately obvious as parts of your body would cook standing next to it."

And yes the mode of exposure from ovens is not as specific as from cell phone use, so if one contracts a tumor from this, the point of entry is not as predictable as from cell phone use. Or better yet USE a regular oven / stove. Far far safer.

"Tell that to all the people who have been burnt by knocking a pan of water over. That definitely causes physiological symptoms."

As to loud mouth know it alls who purport something safe (with respect to cancer or behaviour / physiology risks) before it is tested, or properly known, well I would not trust them with anything, especially the health and safety of my family.

"I'm pretty sure that the British Standard for microwaves involves a rigorous testing procedure. The British Standards (BS EN 60 335-2-25 2002 for domestic models and BS 5175 for catering models), set the maximum limit of energy leakage during the life of a cooker at 5 milliwatts per square centimetre from a cooker door."

Yours Truly, anonymous

"P.S. Anonymous should be pretty easy to identify as the best way to protect your delicate inner ear is to put a conductor between it and the microwave source; like a tin foil hat. I would also like point out the number of ad hominem attacks that anonymous has made; normally an indication that the person knows that there argument is based on shaky foundations."

I hope that you can publish a few of these comments; FYI I have just received a degree in Chemistry from Oxford so I have a inkling of the science behind the effects of EM radiation.

Best Regards

Ben Langley