Gadgetopia

These parents better steer clear of the cel relay towers, the telco microwave relay stations, doppler weather radar installations, microwave ovens, areas that have wireless cable tv & internet access, etc. Radio waves are radio waves, and if these parents knew how often they expose their kids to low-intensity, high-frequency radio wave energy, they'd move to an Iowa cornfield.

This lawsuit is going nowhere because that "growing body of evidence" is about as credible as the gentleman from Nigeria who wants me to help him get his $45 million.

"This lawsuit is going nowhere because that "growing body of evidence" is about as credible as the gentleman from Nigeria who wants me to help him get his $45 million."

HEY!! That guy emailed me too! Awesome, we'll BOTH be rich...

Actually, WiFi (802.11b specifically) operates in the same frequency range as the very common 2.4GHz cordless phone. (Try talking on your phone when you're using WiFi sometime: "snap, crackle, pop") I would bet that a large number of these folks have those phones in their house.

Isn't hypocrasy fun?

It's all very well shouting "hysteria" guys, but noone has ever explained why 2.4Ghz at 1 watt for 8 hours from a wifi WOULDNT be as dangerous as 2.4Ghz at 1000 watts for 1/2 a minute inside a microwave oven. Its a reasonable worry, so lets think about it instead of taking the...

Nick: It's kinda the same principle as fire in that intensity and proximity determine the level of "danger"; 2.4GHz at 1 watt is like having a candle burning in the room with you. 2.4GHz at 1000 watts is like a fire in a fireplace. Can the candle hurt you? Sure, if you stick your finger in it. Can 2.4GHz at 1 watt hurt you? Maybe, if you were trying to substitute the antenna with your finger by holding onto the antenna cable.

What I want to know is what are the effects of keeping kids away from WiFi. I read an article on another site where one of these parents said he would keep his kids ou of the classroom when WiFi was being used. This interferes with the kids learning far more than an hour of WiFi exposure would.

I also question how many of these parents who complain use Mobile phones. Mobile phones output more "danger" becuase they must send a signal for KMs, not Metres.

Good comment by the way Nick. If these parents keep their kids out of class, then why not throw them in the fire?

wifi is good for 100meters until the ubiquitous network is soon formed one transmitter will go 35km ! the point is that this is not the only exposure that these kids have theres a whole lot more out there its pea soup. i hope we evolve quickly because theres gonna be some mutations. you guys are just bit part actors, cannon fodda sucked in by the lord of the air ! Go on sell your souls on a game no one will hear your screams !! That candle you mentioned above - it just fell over you have 3 minutes to leave the room !!!!!!!!!!!

A pissed off electrosensitive anon.

Let me tell you people. The danger is real. What it is all about are: 1) Proximity to the transmitters, 2) time spent next to those transmitters in a stationary position, 3) length of time exposed.

I lived in the same house with my father for 5 years. In that house, I had one 802.11g WiFi base station, and my 802.11b laptop both running 24/7 - on all the time. They were both located in the same room. I worked in that room at home sitting in a chair approx 12 hours a day, every day, moving little. I was 6 feet from the base station, and 3 feet from my laptop which was on my desk off to my left side at about abdomen level. I sat next to these 2 transmitters for over 3 years - in the same position every single day, absorbing that radiation every day.

My father didn't spend his days in the house, but he did sleep in it. His bed was directly on the other side of the wall in the next room less than 5 feet away from both transmitters. I am 36, he is 69.

Well guess what? We BOTH got cancer of the kidneys. Same cancer, same location, same organs, same type of cancer - on the outer lining of the kidneys. There is no history of this cancer in our families.

The pattern is clear. If you are in an office building 50 feet from the transmitters, or moving around a lot, or spending an hour a day next to them, or if you move from room to room, or if you turn them on and off, then my bet is you will never have a problem. It's the same as a cell phone or tower: in the case of a phone you're only absorbing energy a few minutes each call - on and off. even though the transmiter is next to your head. In the case of the towers you are usually moving relative to them, and they are miles away, even though their energy is much higher.

But in the above case I mentioned, where two people in the same house both spending multiple hours per day stationary next to two of these transmitters and then developing the SAME kind of cancer, well, it's not hard to figure out what happened.

Those things are putting out microwave energy. Those signals are hitting living tissues. Sure they are WAY less power than a microwave but think about it: if you are sleeping within 6 feet of one, then your body is not moving while you are sleeping. It's receiving the same microwave enegry 7,8,9 hours every single night over and over and over - pinging your body every night for YEARS. Your cells are absorbing all that microwave energy.

The moral is it's the constant long-term exposure day after day after day in the same location at the same power and frequency, onto the same body that causes cancer.

The danger is real. We need to be warning people about how and why these things can cause cancer.

For example the new flat panel iMac has two WiFi transmitter blocks across the top of the machine inside - almost exactly at head-level. Now if some kid is using one twice a week for an hour each in a classroom, the odds are there is no danger.

But now imagine you are an office worker using the same machine.

That transmiter is less than twelve inches from your brain. You're sitting there 8-10 hours every day in the same position. That thing is beaming its energy right onto your brain from less than a foot away. If you do that every single day month after month and year after year, you are effectively "drilling" a microwave hole into your brain. You're going to get cancer from it.

I am not a doctor or physicist but I have EE friends who tell me 2.4GHz is right at the water frequency and so does not pass through the body. However, there are many different types of tissues in the body. It might just be that one particular type of human body tissue is receptive to that frequency and absorbs it. Say - for example the outer lining of the kidneys.

This is a real problem and we all need to be aware of it. It happened to me and my father. We weren't imagining our cancers.

Turn your WiFi off when not using it. Move your base stations as far from people as possible.

Better yet - just stop using them at all and go back to wired - I did.

Thanks for your story, James, and I'm sorry for the cancer you and your dad are dealing with. But if the connection between your cancer and the wi-fi is that cut & dried, how do you explain the thousands (millions?) of people who use wi-fi in similar situations and don't have cancer? There are literally thousands of other possible environmental elements that could be at the root of your cancer.

"if the connection between your cancer and the wi-fi is that cut & dried, how do you explain the thousands (millions?) of people who use wi-fi in similar situations and don't have cancer? There are literally thousands of other possible environmental elements that could be at the root of your cancer."

Very simple Dave: it's not "WiFi" per se, or "Cell phones" per se. It's how one receives radiation from these sources. It is repeated, constant exposure to concentrated radiation over and over and over on the same spot on the body that causes the cancer. You've seen what Microwaves do to food when the energy is focused and power applied in one spot right? Well, now just imagine that same energy, yet thousands of times weaker - but concentrated on one spot of living tissue over and over 13 hours a day for 5 years. Not a thousand watts for 30 seconds, but 15 milliwatts for 5 years. The absorbed energy is the same. And in the case of people - it's living tissue that is being blasted.

THAT is why some people get cancer from microwave radiation (WiFi) and some don't. Many people would use it in an office where the transmitter is 50 feet away, or they are moving around the office a lot, or they are travellers who use it infrequently for email, etc. In all of those cases they turn it on, then off, on then off, or they are moving or are far from the transmitters so their bodies are not absorbing concentrated radiation from 2 feet away on the same spot over and over and over every day for years. In short, it's the usage pattern that is the difference. And that usage pattern explains why some are affected and some aren't. That is the difference. Understand?

It's not about power and frequencies. It's all about concentration of energy on the same spot over a long term. Like the microwave oven, WiFi cooks tissues - it just does it so much more slowly and over time - and with far less noticable effects until it is way too late.

I am willing to bet that in a study with 100 mice with WiFi transmitters strapped to their backs and on full power for 3 years every day vs. 100 mice placed 50 feet from a WiFi transmitter and allowed to move around, almost none in the 2nd group would develop cancer but a lot in the first ground would.

Anyone care to take me up on this offer and conduct the experiment?

The moral here is: keep WiFi devices FAR from your body and only use them infequently. There is no need to use WiFi at home. Go wired at home - unless that is, you enjoy having kidney cancer. Let me tell you, it's not fun.

i think there's enough reasonable doubt here for such an unbiased experiment to be conducted. why don't you do it? there are alternative frequncies effective over the short range which are known to be safe. a smart company will provide that alternative and advertise it as such. democracy right! the freedom to choose a product which is known to be safe rather than hedging your bets and being cynical and arrogant about it. i'm sure that there are commercial advantages to using microwave frequency bands though concern about safety is not one of them. what are the alternatives and who provides them? i ain't gonna use that shit untill i see prooven to be unbiased evidence that it is safe for my purposes. sure there's a lot of harmful frequencies out there and they're out there bombarding us because of complacent capitulating sheep and the self- interested disregarding assholes who are responsible for pushing them onto us. i value my right to choose if only within the realm left to me. if there's a chance, i aint gonna take it ! fools go ahead! where is our democratic right to choose not to be exposed going to be?? we have power as consumers what are the alternatives in safe wireless in the meantime while we are waiting for evidence of safety?? Lets toss around some alternatives aye??

Perhaps lessening the power output of both wifi transmitters would help reduce any dangers. There should be a setting in your router and card setup that will enable you to reduce the power by as much as 85%, which is fine if you are in a small area such as an apartment.

I'm sorry about what happened to James and his father, but there really isn't any logic between their cancers and the WiFi. Understandably because it's a relatively new technology it will be the one most feared and therefore most likely to be blamed for any shortcomings. However, saying that kidney cancers are caused by WiFi transmitters is like saying that the new house I just bought should be blamed for my case of the flu. Because of their blood relation and the fact that they shared the same house and most likely the same diet, there are multiple other culprits in this case. It could have been the water they drank, the insulation in their house, or even a genetic pre-disposition towards kidney cancer that only revealed itself due to a provocation by their environment which.. I agree COULD have been the WiFi but could have just as likely been any other factor in their house. Furthermore, the radio frequencies of WiFi go through our entire bodies and if they do mutate our DNA to cause cancer, they would do so randomly and NOT LOCALIZE to the kidney like in the previously described case. Honestly I would have been more convinced of the link between WiFi and cancer had the cancers been in different locations because James and his father were not exposed to the frequencies in the exact same capacity. Instead I'm only convinced that the cancer was most likely caused by something that could be either inhaled or injested and not something that ubiquitously travels through the body like WiFi transmissions.

I am so glad I have found this site.In the UK,brain tumours have increased in numbers by something like 40 % in the last 10 years. When I was contacted by the Cancer research fund to ask if I would like to increase my monthly donations,I explained that they already know what causes cancer.We all do !! But rather than promote avoidance of substances and radiactivity , we look for a cure.The reply I got was " well I don't know if you know luv,but I only work here". The fund I was donating to,was for finding a cure not for prevention. The Cancer research organisation wants to find the root cause/s.It wants to know why these things cause cancer- It already knows that they do. There was an anouncement made on British TV recently ,that toothpastes,shampoos,soaps,shower gels and perfumes all cause cancer.Well WHY haven't they been taken off the market.It's because the Cancer research Society haven't found the root cause ! In the mean time we are told that Microwave energy causes cancer.It's still on the market in many forms.Noone seems able to pin this down.In fact noone can pin down the cause of cancer on many substances.The point I am making is that if you all are waiting for Government to intervene then you are going to have a very long wait.I suggest you all minimise your risks.Homeplug is a very good alternative to Wifi. 2.4 Ghz is microwave energy but low intensity. Microwave frequencies are in the region 1 - 300 Ghz Emigrate !

I see the point of the cancer story (and I'm sorry for you), but the others are right: it makes no sense that wifi would concentrate on the kidneys just because of wifi. Is there any research that being stationary near wifi causes cancer?

Truth be told, I haven't seen sufficient research which indicates that wifi is either safe or dangerous, but if you have any links of real studies, I would be interested.

There have been other world changes within the last 10 years aside from wifi, you know. Who says that new chemicals or a lack of some natural old ones in the environment or in virus shots aren't the culprit of cancer boost? Maybe lack of exercise among certain groups is the cause. Maybe it's a combo.

But since there is a doubt, companies DEFINITELY should use a safe frequency in their wifi. They would boost their sales that way, too. Another idea would be to have wifi which is directed in certain directions and blocked from going in other directions.

I too agree with Tong. The kidney cancers seem too localized to be caused by Wifi radiation.

Wifi needs high frequencies to work at the data transmission speeds required. There really are no "safer" alternatives. As many have said, it's a matter of proximity to the transmission source and power levels, and duration of exposure.

I have a pet rat who's cage is very near my wireless hub in my den. Now I'm thinking of moving her cage....

we can argue till the cows come home about what factor caused the above mentioned cancer. I believe we shouldn't just rate things on " do they cause cancer or not" this is far too simplistic and often unprovable in these multi-factor times. Personally I have been electrically sensitive for the past five years. With different signals triggering different physical reactions in my body. I react to Wi-Fi hotspots with a sensation of acute pressure in the ear cavities, loss of coordination and a " burnt" feeling in the brain for some time after exposure. This cannot be good in anyones book. These things are always tricky to measure in a science lab and results will invariably call for further research to be conducted. I advise you to always opt for wired tranmissions where available.

Oh dear, this is wrong wrong wrong. "What it is all about are: 1) Proximity to the transmitters, 2) time spent next to those transmitters in a stationary position, 3) length of time exposed."

Microwaves heat water at a specific frequency of 2.45 GHz, not 2.4GHz. There is a massive difference between these, you must understand. Your body is NOT absorbing all this energy. The heating done by a microwave oven is caused by the effects of dielectric heating, when dipolar water molecules begin to rotate as they align themselves with the radiation at that specific frequency.

Your pseudoscience explanation is just misinforming people who visit this site. It is a co-incidence that you and your father both got cancer, but I have to agree with people who say it seems too localised.

"It?s not about power and frequencies. It?s all about concentration of energy on the same spot over a long term. Like the microwave oven, WiFi cooks tissues - it just does it so much more slowly and over time - and with far less noticable effects until it is way too late." My explanation of how a microwave oven works has debunked your theory. Sorry if I come across harsh, but attempts at explaining it scientifically just failed.

Nice, Bob.

So is there no frequency aside from that of the current wifi that can transmit data? Infrared transmits data, it just doesn't go through things. There are plenty of "safer" frequencies which could work.

I have heard that cell phones cause cancer in areas of the body nearest the antena of the phone. I am very skeptical of wireless devices being safe. I think that more research needs to be done on this subject. Big businesses who make money off of these products do not want research that suggests that their products are unsafe. They will lie and make up false results if the accurate results of their own tests show that wireless devices are unsafe.

We live in a business culture. Money is how ownership is managed and ultimately how people survive. The environment and the health of living things is over-looked if it interferes with capitol gain. Big business people don't want to be scientists. They hire scientists to test their products and then get mad if the results are unfavorable. Many of these business people were the spoiled children of wealthy people. They got what they wanted for Christmas and nothing less. They only know money and money is all they WANT to know. They want, yachts, mansions, sports cars, and the freedom to sit around without doing much work. They feel that whatever makes them a lot of money will make their lives easy. They hate rationality and will not think in a logical manner if it makes less money. They wish to think of themselves as invulnerable kings and queens who can defy the laws of the earth, yet they kill themselves with their own stupidity.

Everything in the world is becomming a mess because people do not like hard work and don't care about science. The problem with the world is that there is right and wrong. Doing the right thing often seems like a lot of work. Doing the wrong thing may look easier but it's consequences are met later. The right thing to do is to slow down and think.

There are many health dangers in the world. Internal combustion vehicles are constantly spewing poison into the air. Chemicals we use for cleaning are poisonous. Many of the jobs in our culture require mostly sedantary work. There is little time to think. Long hours are required in most factories and in many office jobs. Some people are on call 24/7 and never know how long they will be able to sleep. The only healthy way of life is the family farming culture. The problem is that there are limited natural resources and our business culture is busy destroying those resources in an effort to make money so those at the top can retire and lay around in bed all day or do whatever they want.

There are many Indigenous people living in the Amazon who suffer and starve because the oil companies destroyed the land. They used to live well before the oil companies came. They hunted and gathered. They were not fat because they were busy doing physically demanding work. Their lifestyle may have seemed harsh but thats just the way the world is. You can choose a healthy way that is physically active or else live a sedantary way that is complicated and creates problems that will end the world anyway.