The WiFi Blues

Philadelphia, the town of brotherly love has it. Many in Bay area want to buy...

Wireless broadband Access to the internet ( WiFi ) seems too good to be true. At

relatively inexpensive, anybody could possibly get on the web any place in a city. All of the city

must do is install WiFi antennas.

A disagreement in support of citywide WiFi is that it'll decrease the digital divide:

the poorer you are, the more limited your use of the web and its own information

resources. Cities like Philadelphia and Bay area are earnestly attempting to close the

digital divide. One option is WiFi.

Yet in weighing the choices, virtually there is nothing learned about the potential health

risks. Saturating a whole city with WiFi increases the existing burden of nonionizing

radiation. That burden, called electrosmog by some, includes long-term

contact with low-level concentrations of nonionizing radiation from familiar sources

like radio and TELEVISION signals, electronic and electrical devices, and the ubiquitous cell

phone.

Wireless Access to the internet

Neighborhood networks ( LANs ) link computers, printers, modems, along with other

devices. Conventional LANs make the links physically using wire cable. Messages

between computers and another devices on the network are managed with a device

called a router.

A radio LAN eliminates the wire cable using a router that transmits and

receives radio signals. To utilize a wired LAN, you need to plug the computer or other

device right into a wall socket. A wire leads from the socket to the router, which manages

signal traffic between your devices on the network.

With a radio LAN, each device on the network is made such that it can send an indication

to the router and receive signals right back. Wireless routers routinely have a variety of a

hundred to many hundred feet. The number could be increased with the addition of a booster

that escalates the signal strength.

Just like all radio signals, the closer you are to the transmitter (the router) the

stronger the signal. Mobile phones work on a single principle. The big difference is that

mobile phones work on another frequency and released a stronger signal than wireless

LANs.

Radio Frequencies

Mobile phones operate at frequencies in the 3 to 30 GHz range, much like microwave

ovens. Wireless LANs operate at one tenth of this range--0. 3 to 3 GHz, the number of

UHF tv broadcasts. GHz means gigaHertz, a typical measure

of radio frequency radiation ( RFR )--electromagnetic radiation developed by

sending an alternating electrical current via an antenna. The larger the GHz,

the faster the present alternates.

Frequency alone doesn't gauge the potential aftereffect of RFR. As you'd

guess, the effectiveness of the signal also matters. The effectiveness of an indication is measured

in watts, a typical way of measuring electrical power. For instance, a 100 watt

lamp is brighter since it creates more energy than the usual 60 watt bulb.

Think about the result of waves at the beach: small waves far apart (low strength, low

frequency) versus large wave close together (high strength, high frequency). The

former will probably have less of an impact compared to latter.

The contact with RFR is measured using SAR--specific absorption rate. SAR is

expressed either in milliwatts/kilogram (mW/kg) of bodyweight or milliwatts/cubic

centimeter (mW/cm2) of exposed human body area: how big the wave and just how much of

the body it strikes.

Health problems

WiFi enthusiasts dismiss health risk concerns since the power output and SAR

exposure is somewhat below the minimum standard set for mobile phones. But cell

phone standards are set for the temporary exposure of a mobile phone being used pressed

to your face. Additionally, the standards are set in line with the thermal (heating) effect

of rays.

Nonthermal ramifications of mobile phones are documented at exposures below the present

US standards, including

- memory loss,

- sleep disruption,

- slowed motor skills and reaction time,

- decreased immune function,

- spatial disorientation and dizziness,

- headaches,

- lowered sperm fertility,

- increased blood circulation pressure and pulse,

- DNA breakage and paid down DNA repair capacity, and

- cell proliferation.

Another problem is that mobile phone exposure is intermittent, whereas WiFi

exposure is constant. A far more accurate comparison would be to the result of mobile phone

broadcast antennas. These antennas receive and send radio frequency signals

constantly.

The signal strength from an antenna resembles a mobile phone only at very close

range. The exposure isn't a cell phone's brief blast but a persistent bath of low-

strength RFR. As well as the health effects documented for mobile phone use,

contact with mobile phone antennas include

- increased blood circulation pressure and pulse,

- sleep disruption,

- emotional effects such as for example increased depression and irritability,

- memory loss and mental fog,

- fatique and vertigo, and

- increased cancer risk.

Due to these effects, the International Association of Firemen (AFL-CIO)

decided in 2004 that they'll maybe not permit mobile phone antennas burning houses.

RFR Hypersensitivity

A lot of the discussion of RFR health effects is framed as an issue with people

who're hypersensitive. Hypersensitivity may be the technical term for allergies

and similar immunity system overreactions. But rather of pollen, RFR

hypersensitivity is really a a reaction to nonionizing

radiation. It would appear that an unlucky few are affected while average folks are off the

hook.

Research by Olle Johansson and Ö rjan Halberg of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm

suggests otherwise. They looked over the incidence of cancer in Europe and the united states

and found a striking association between your upsurge in certain cancers throughout the

20th Century and exposure RFR as measured by radio and TELEVISION broadcasts.

What the hypersensitive really represent is one extreme in a complex landscape of

effects and risks. The same as every other environmental stressor, RFR will affect some

people a lot more than the others. So that as with other environmental stressors, the higher the

over all burden, the higher the danger to become among the the "unlucky few. "

Wireless LANs increase the existing burden of RFR. Just like burning more fossil fuels

adds more smog, adding more RFR adds more electrosmog. It's not necessary to

expose your house or your city to the increased burden developed by WiFi. There is a

viable alternative: a wired LAN. The hype might create it seem less convenient and

more costly. But what's a great night's sleep worth? Or lowering your threat of

cancer?

Resources

International Association of Firemen. 2004. Position on the Effects from

Radio Frequency/Microwave (RF/MW) Radiation in Fire Department Facilities from

Base Stations for Antennas and Towers for the Conduction of Mobile phone

Transmissions. Access at

celltowerfinal. htm.

Johansson, Olle and Doug Loranger. 2005. Electrosmog. Your personal Health insurance and

Fitness. Broadcast November 29, 2005.

radiation. html.

Sage, Cindy. 2005. Discuss Bay area TechConnect Community Wireless

Broadband Initiative. Sage Associates: September 2005.