RSS
Canadian Schools Ban WiFi Based On Bad Science
from the and-what-are-they-teaching-our-kids dept
A decade ago, we first wrote about some freaked out, clueless parents suing a school district for wanting to install a WiFi network. The parents believed -- based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever -- that WiFi networks emitted "harmful" electro-magnetic radiation. Since then, we've heard of many such stories of people fearing the health impacts of WiFi, despite a near total lack of evidence of any harm at all. Studies have found that an entire year sitting next to a WiFi access point gives you the equivalent radiation of 20 minutes on a mobile phone. And yet, every few years, we hear about parents or politicians freaking out about the issue and trying to get WiFi banned in schools.
Amazingly, they've succeeded in some places, including 12 elementary and middle schools up in Canada, which are now being called out by a group called "Bad Science Watch" for making decisions based on absolutely and totally bogus science. You can read the full report here, in which they call out "anti-WiFi activists" who are "spreading misinformation." It seems they ought to call out schools as well. You would think that places of learning would investigate the actual science.
Amazingly, they've succeeded in some places, including 12 elementary and middle schools up in Canada, which are now being called out by a group called "Bad Science Watch" for making decisions based on absolutely and totally bogus science. You can read the full report here, in which they call out "anti-WiFi activists" who are "spreading misinformation." It seems they ought to call out schools as well. You would think that places of learning would investigate the actual science.
These claims are not substantiated by the scientific literature and have little acceptance from medical professionals and the scientific community. This activism therefore amounts to nothing more than fear-mongering by misguided special interest groups who are attempting to have these networks removed.
Nevertheless, the media has been all too willing to fan the flames of controversy and has contributed to a growing false uncertainty over the safety of WiFi. As a result many school boards, libraries, and town councils across Canada have been called on by concerned citizens to limit or remove WiFi networks.
I’m looking for policy...
Jon Potter: Software Patent Trolls Can Be Stopped By U.S. Patent Office And Congress
Application Developers Alliance Applauds Schumer Plan To Introduce Patent Legislation
I have a business...
How To Successfully Get Your App Into China
To Understand The Data Move It Closer
I have an app...
Top 5 Reasons Why Mobile Analytics Is Important
Developer Census: Be Counted. It takes less than two minutes.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
But Mike...
If you give them free wi-fi then the kids won't have any reason to go to class anymore since they can get all their stuff easily from anywhere.
Now who doesn't want to go to the class with the annoying teacher who always picks on you for no reason?
*Remembers in high school we didn't have wi-fi, we had Lan parties to play Descent until the computer teacher uninstalled it from all computers*
Man, that was some fun matches.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
As if that's acceptable ! I've been using cell phones since 1996. And as a result, many years ago I began caring about personal freedom, human rights, and fairness in life. Clearly it was the radiation from those cell phones that fried my brain into thinking this way.
So clearly then, we can draw a direct correlation to the notion that the wifi I've been using for the past year and a half was responsible for even more of my brain being fried, and thus the reason I became a Techdirt insider. Clearly that decision was not rational or logical, so it must have been the fault of the wifi!
Thank God someone's thinking logically enough to save the children!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: But Mike...
Sadly, I'm much older than you. We had no such things as computers. VCRs had just become fashionable in our school's AV department, although film reels were still all the rage except for special occasions like taping the high school football games.
So I joined the AV club, and became the student in charge, reporting directly to our advisor. Which meant I was free to skip classes, using "has an assignment to operate film equipment" notes.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Which undoubtedly they would use to share their loot...aham...media.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The same study found that anyone who had used the Telephone or Telegraph or that dangfangled Marconi device before 1890 is now dead! Dead I tell you!!! and they mostly withered away and got all wrinkled with loss of hair before they died too.
It's a tragedy. Next I propose an ending to this radiation we are all getting that operates at the dastardly levels of between 380 to 740 nanometres. It not only can cause cancer it burns too!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
In related news...
is called "hydroxyl acid", the substance is the major component of acid rain.
contributes to the "greenhouse effect".
may cause severe burns.
is fatal if inhaled.
contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.
accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.
may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes.
has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.
Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:
as an industrial solvent and coolant.
in nuclear power plants.
in the production of Styrofoam.
as a fire retardant.
in many forms of cruel animal research.
in the distribution of pesticides. Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical.
as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In related news...
ok.. for those who don't realise. The chemical formula for is H2O
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: In related news...
The chemical formula for dihydrogen monoxide is: with di meaning two for the hydrogen and mono meaning one for the Oxygen (oxide) H2O
Most people commonly refer to this dangerous substance that can kill you though you are made up of +70% of it as
WATER!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: In related news...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
How to steal others hard work using the DMCA
That was just priceless.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Maybe it is due to the proliferation of wifi enabled devices which the students are not allowed to have or use while in school. In that case, what do the teachers need wifi for? Furthermore, if it's only the administration staff that need connectivity, then I'm guessing that hard wiring would be less expensive.
Or, perhaps it is the lucrative telecommunications industry calling for towers on school property for which the school district gets a pittance. This would make more sense as to why folks are getting all upset about it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: In related news...
So, given this, and the theme of the article, I am pretty sure the other poster meant it as a joke...which you kind of, you know, ruined.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: In related news...
Yes, it was a big joke and quite a few lolz were had. but are you positive about that statement? Surely, anything can be dangerous in certain circumstances.
Who claimed that carbon monoxide was not bad for you because it is a naturally occurring gas, was it Michele Bachmann?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: In related news...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: In related news...
"Every day, about ten people die from unintentional drowning. Of these, two are children aged 14 or younger. Drowning ranks fifth among the leading causes of unintentional injury death in the United States."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: In related news...
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpu26ggu641qj1cg2o1_500.jpg
"Oh dear, this bullshit again"
Stop getting wound up about this. The whole thing is intended to be a hoax, a joke to expose people so reactionary about surface level "threats" that they don't even look into what they're getting angry/scared about. As in, you know, people who want to ban wifi without any real evidence of harm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
They should at least require someone to be 18 to purchase it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
You are so wrong. Here's why.
Last week I had to give my neighbor money for medicine because he works in an industry which has been killed off by Internet Piracy (carwash).
Mick never even bothered to assume the fact that less Wifi in schools means less child porn creation, and more importantly, tornado clients cannot work on No Internet.
Google just wants Mick to pay him money.
**Copyright 2013. Unauthorized reproduction strictly prohibited**
**This comment is protected by RightClickBeGone 2.23 (trial - unlicensed)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You are so wrong. Here's why.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: You are so wrong. Here's why.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In related news...
Let us compromise.
Instead of banning it, purchasers should have to be over 18, show ID, and sign a register with each purchase. And be limited to 100 mL/day.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Really? No these are wireless networks like we put in our homes that they are freaking about up here.
Next time think before you write something down.
Yes we know the parents up here and a bunch of idiots that believe this. The best is that parents are saying that little Johnny or Suzie have headaches at school because of the wifi, but forget to mention that these Headaches only come on the days they have tests.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Wiring WAS cheaper in the past. Today most computers come with built-in wi-fi capabilities. Also, wireless setups make it much easier to move things around and change layouts. The only real reasoning to use wired connections is 1- security and 2- speed.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
*Grew up in such a religion*
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Evolution of the species
We are watching the birth of the Idiocracy.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
It is forced on everyone from birth. Children are now hooked on it and will die if they don't get their fix of "Dihydrogen Monoxide".
For the children let us ban this illicit "Dihydrogen Monoxide" before even more children become dependent on this substance.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I have assisted in projects at my employer to expand office space and install additional network drops and gear. When you factor the hourly rate for the wiring techs, the cost of cabling and accessories, and the network gear to expand the network to accommodate the expansion, adding just 30 cubes can easily run into tens of thousands of dollars.
Now expand that to a multi-room school and you can see that the cost to wire it would easily reach into 6 figures.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Not dangerous?
Wifi networks DO emit harmful electromagnetic radiation. It's in the Microwave band 2.4 GHz, exactly the same as your microwave oven, only (usually, if everyone follows instructions) at a low enough dosage that it doesn't do anything.
Of course, that didn't stop the network guys at my old work who purposely bought mismatched giant antennas for the WiFi router and were literally frying the brain of the receptionist sitting underneath with low-dose microwaves. (Some math from a ham radio operator that worked for us proved why she was feeling light-headed every day since they put it in, it was like a 90 watt microwave oven).
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
If the government comes across this they will possibly take this post as evidence that WiFi is deadly and anyone owning a router is a terrorist.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In related news...
LOL
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Ad-Hoc networks are all WiFi.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Studies show...
The real issue isn't that it's good or bad, it's that there is "absolutely no evidence whatsoever". Unfortunately in the case of wifi and other similar technologies that are stirring people's emotions, the complaints are about the long-term effects which we frankly cannot know until it's been a significantly long-term exposure.
One thing you have to keep in mind to remain completely neutral and unbiased on the subject is that there are advocates on BOTH SIDES that have no information or evidence of what they're trying to prove.
I just hope that in 30 years when talking to my kids I can tell them that the technology was a huge advancement instead of a huge health hindrance.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Studies show...
Indeed. However, if somebody's going to start banning things "for the children" based on zero evidence (and while there is certainly evidence that access to it *benefits* their education), I'd prefer to demand proof. Rolling over just because someone thinks there might be harmful effects is as wrong as merely letting people ban vaccines, videogames, movies, TVs, books, music or whatever else the current nutjob scapegoat of the week is.
The call for banning things just because there's a fear about them, especially from those who don't understand them, will never stop. Only the target of that call will change. But, it's down to them to prove that the ill effects outweigh the benefits. While those things you mentioned do seem obviously bad in hindsight, that's just a matter of perspective. There are many other things that have mostly positive effects that were called to be banned over the same timescale, and that same hindsight shows them up for the stupidity that those calls were.
People should keep an open mind, but these things should only be happening when there's a real reason to believe that they are harmful. Until then, you're probably basing any ban on baseless fears from people who usually don't understand the thing they're talking about.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
WiFi is bad because it's WiFi, not because of "health concerns"
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Facts
POINT IS-- The danger to a signal is related to HOW CLOSE you are to the broadcast element (stength, not frequency, is what you have to fear). Like with cell phones, if it's right up against your head you're bombarding your cells with high signal... just like breaking up a stone in your kidney with ultalow wave lengths. But step a distance away and the signal degrades... becomes harmless.
Dr. B
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Facts
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But, then again, it is true that humans used to be a lot more badass several thousand years ago.
Even if humans didn't live nearly as long as they do these days.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not dangerous?
Umm - wouldn't that mean it's *not* harmful? You know, like if it doesn't "do anything", then (by definition) isn't causing HARM, and therefor is not HARMful.
Microwave radiation just causes heat - heat in and of itself isn't harmful - every house in Canada has a furnace that produces *way* more heat than any Wifi device could put out in a year.
90 watts isn't an "oven" - 90 watts is barely a lightbulb. If she was feeling lightheaded, it wasn't because of a 90 watt transmitter near her.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: In related news...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: In related news...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not dangerous?
That's pretty high. I hope they had an FCC license for it, because they take that sort of thing pretty seriously.
No, it wasn't. "Literally frying" would be that the receptionists brain was actually being cooked at temperatures that would cause it to sizzle. Low-dose microwaves wouldn't be able to do anything other than a slight warming.
That entire anecdote sounds incredibly implausible. It's far more likely that the ransom ham radio operator's math was wrong.
If there was really a concern, why didn't somebody rent a meter and directly measure the amount of power in the emissions?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not dangerous?
Now the difference between standing in a wifi zone, and a microwave is ~60DBm. To put it another way, the person standing next to you is emitting the same amount of energy as just over 3000 laptops wifi. If you afraid of wifi, you should be deathly afraid of other people.
Numbers came from here.. any math was my fault :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBm#Unit_conversions
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
So does the sun.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
And for God's sake, don't wear clothes, the friction just might generate static electricity. If you do wear clothes, don't move!
Petting your cat is just asking for trouble!
Remember, everything gives you cancer.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
It kills thousands every year directly. It is, however, present in large quantities in every person that dies, so it has become quite a problem in our groundwater supplies.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Evolution of the species
Evolution did favor individuals that were most intelligent and useful, as they didn't tend to get themselves killed off before they could procreate. Which is why we are here. We have removed those pressures, which has reduced the need for intelligence and usefulness in order to survive and breed.
We have created the birth of Idiocracy, not evolution. I suspect the problem with Idiocracy is that at some time between now and its fruition, we will lose the ability to keep those pressures removed; they will reintroduce themselves and the process will begin anew (or, we'll evolve in another, more productive direction.)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Yes ma'am - will do ... I'm sure the industry experts are not influencing decisions about such things up there.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Evolution of the species
This is perhaps the wrong way to look at it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But, seriously, there are accounts of people back then doing some amazingly crazy things. Where do you think the term "marathon" comes from? From the guy who ran across Greece in less than a day non-stop, over the mountains, across rivers, etc to deliver one message.
Today we think of that stuff as impossible, but, think about it, we have technology to make our lives easier, and yet, people back then built the pyramids and other monuments and scientists today are still trying to figure it out.
Today you're strong if you can lift your own body weight. Back then children apparently could rip the jaws off of a donkey with relative ease.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not dangerous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I also do not agree that decisions are based on 'bad science' I do not believe that is such a thing, it is in fact good science, that determined the harmful effects of electromagnetic radiation, it is 'bad politics' to use good science for the wrong reasons.
yes, you can compare it to some time on a cellular phone, but it would be far better to equate it with a period of time standing in sunshine..
middle of the day you receive 1200 watts per meter square, a wifi would be microwatts.. millions of times less that 1 second in the sun.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not dangerous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Studies show...
Wrong. There have been many studies by scientific, medical and health organisations to gather evidence.
Look up the reports produced by the UK HPA, the National Cancer Institute SEER programme the Interphone study, the CEFALO study, the FDA, the CDC and the FAA.
You will find evidence produced by studying hundreds of thousands of phone users
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Studies show...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
you are the idiots, hahahahahaha-hahahahaha
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wireless safety
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wireless? Is it safe?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
A bunch of no-brain air suckers...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment