German Warning About Wifi

[Manopolus]

Is there any actual science behind this? All I've been able to pull up are vague warnings with no actual evidence... some claims of it needing to be studied more.

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...arns-citizens-to-avoid-using-wifi-401845.html

Isn't Wifi just radio waves?

 

[Dr. Imago]

Florian Emrich, for the office, says Wi-Fi should be avoided "because people receive exposures from many sources and because it is a new technology and all the research into its health effects has not yet been carried out".

This is called putting the answer before the question.

~Dr. Imago

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Isn't Wifi just radio waves?

The problem is that people hear the word "radiation" and instantly think of Hiroshima and Chernobyl, even though the word covers a whole range of things. To my knowledge, visible light and heat are examples of things that would fall in under the "radiation" category, but which we kinda need to live.

I also love to link to this handy XKCD radiation chart whenever this topic comes up. Basically, as far as I have understood it, there are two possibilities:

a. that cell phone and WiFi radiation does not pose a danger to humans, or

b. that this radiation does pose a danger, in which case we will probably all develop cancer and die no matter what we do to our cell phones and routers, since the radiation levels from other sources are far, far higher.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Sifting through the Google hits on all the usual alarmists I found this:

http://web.princeton.edu/sites/ehs/radiation/nirad.htm
University Position Statement
Conclusion and General Recommendations

It is the general consensus of the scientific community that the level of RF exposure due to wireless networks is so low compared to the many other RF sources in the modern environment that health concerns from WiFi exposure are not an issue. The results of the survey of Firestone Library support the data and conclusions from other WiFi surveys. We can reasonably say that the wireless networks present at Princeton University do not present a hazard to persons working or otherwise spending time in University buildings.

They site a number of studies.

I'll keep an open mind but I'm not changing my router just yet.

 

[Joey McGee]

Same guys who are still stumbling on GMOs, next they might warn people not to use their microwaves?

 

[Manopolus]

The problem is that people hear the word "radiation" and instantly think of Hiroshima and Chernobyl, even though the word covers a whole range of things. To my knowledge, visible light and heat are examples of things that would fall in under the "radiation" category, but which we kinda need to live.

I also love to link to this handy XKCD radiation chart whenever this topic comes up. Basically, as far as I have understood it, there are two possibilities:

a. that cell phone and WiFi radiation does not pose a danger to humans, or

b. that this radiation does pose a danger, in which case we will probably all develop cancer and die no matter what we do to our cell phones and routers, since the radiation levels from other sources are far, far higher.

Unfortunately, your link is specific to ionizing radiation... cell phones and Wifi don't actually transmit ionizing radiation... so it doesn't quite relate. I'm not saying that you aren't generally correct (I wouldn't know either way)... but it's RF radiation we're talking about here.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Germany warns citizens to avoid using Wi-Fi

People should avoid using Wi-Fi wherever possible because of the risks it may pose to health, the German government has said.

Its surprise ruling – the most damning made by any government on the fast-growing technology – will shake the industry...

the Federal Office for Radiation Protection – is leading the calls for caution.

That news article is from 2007. Does the ruling still stand? I can't find any reference to it on their website.

 

[Manopolus]

That news article is from 2007. Does the ruling still stand? I can't find any reference to it on their website.

Yeah... it's apparently a reprint or something. That was mentioned a bit ago by one that brought it to my attention elsewhere. I wasn't aware of that initially.


This one mentions studies... but I haven't got around to trying to look them up yet:

http://prd34.blogspot.no/2013/07/switzerland-teachers-vote-to-keep-wi-fi.html?spref=fb

(ETA) Here's something:

According to this, cell phones reduce sperm motility in rats (and thus may decrease fertility in males).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19578660

 

[dlorde]

Florian Emrich, for the office, says Wi-Fi should be avoided "because people receive exposures from many sources and because it is a new technology and all the research into its health effects has not yet been carried out".

How can we ever know when all the research into its health effects has been carried out?

 

[marplots]

How can we ever know when all the research into its health effects has been carried out?

The subjects are euthanized and not replaced.

 

[Manopolus]

This one is just scary:

http://aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.html

I'm starting to be a bit less skeptical about it.... but I'm not at all sure how sound this source is. It looks legit enough.

(ETA) This looks sort of woo-ish, however:

Although these studies clearly show causality and disprove the claim that health effects from RF exposure are uncertain, there is another mechanism that proves electromagnetic frequencies, including radiofrequencies, can negatively impact human health. Government agencies and industry set safety standards based on the narrow scope of Newtonian or "classical" physics reasoning that the effects of atoms and molecules are confined in space and time. This model supports the theory that a mechanical force acts on a physical object and thus, long-range exposure to EMF and RF cannot have an impact on health if no significant heating occurs. However, this is an incomplete model. A quantum physics model is necessary to fully understand and appreciate how and why EMF and RF fields are harmful to humans.26,27 In quantum physics and quantum field theory, matter can behave as a particle or as a wave with wave-like properties. Matter and electromagnetic fields encompass quantum fields that fluctuate in space and time. These interactions can have long-range effects which cannot be shielded, are non-linear and by their quantum nature have uncertainty. Living systems, including the human body, interact with the magnetic vector potential component of an electromagnetic field such as the field near a toroidal coil.26,28,29 The magnetic vector potential is the coupling pathway between biological systems and electromagnetic fields.26,27 Once a patient's specific threshold of intensity has been exceeded, it is the frequency which triggers the patient's reactions.

Yeah, it's all about the quantum uncertainty, you see. Sheesh, never mind.

 

[IXP]

I can just hear the conversation at a tanning salon. "I don't have WIFI in my house because it causes cancer".

IXP

 

[SezMe]

I dunno, Manopolus. From your link:

In the last 20 years, our physicians began seeing patients who reported that electric power lines, televisions and other electrical devices caused a wide variety of symptoms. By the mid 1990's, it became clear that patients were adversely affected by electromagnetic fields and becoming more electrically sensitive.

I have no doubt that patients reported those effects, but that is the same period over which bogus claims were made. How would any patient know that power lines (for example) caused their symptoms as opposed to numerous other causes.

Also, I don't know what mechanism could cause someone to become more electrically sensitive. Especially since they subsequently argue that the effects take place at the quantum level.

It reads to me that they had a foregone conclusion and used various studies to support that conclusion.

 

[Manopolus]

I dunno, Manopolus. From your link:


I have no doubt that patients reported those effects, but that is the same period over which bogus claims were made. How would any patient know that power lines (for example) caused their symptoms as opposed to numerous other causes.

Also, I don't know what mechanism could cause someone to become more electrically sensitive. Especially since they subsequently argue that the effects take place at the quantum level.

It reads to me that they had a foregone conclusion and used various studies to support that conclusion.

Yeah... I only thought it was legit by skimming and not reading half of it. It certainly looks professional (sort of... until you start actually reading). I didn't even know we had woo doctors in Kansas other than chiropractors. Wichita is sort of a whole other planet, anyway.

 

[dlorde]

This one is just scary:

http://aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.html

I'm starting to be a bit less skeptical about it.

The AAEM are not approved by the American Board of Medical Specialties^WP and the quality and neutrality of their work has been questioned, not least by QuackWatch...

Science-Based Medicine has an article about environmental medicine as promoted by the AEEM:

...The American Board of Medical Specialties was wise not to recognize environmental medicine as a legitimate specialty. It appears to have more in common with quackery than with science-based medicine.

As an ex-employee of the Medical Research Council Environmental Physiology Unit (London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine), I would point out that not all environmental medicine is quite so questionable

 

[malicus]

I'm starting to be a bit less skeptical about it.... but I'm not at all sure how sound this source is. It looks legit enough.

Marked as questionable on Quackwatch.

You pays yer money............etc.

 

[Manopolus]

Somebody I've been discussing this with on Facebook asked me to post a couple of links on the topic (he's been following along):

http://www.gq.com/cars-gear/gear-and-gadgets/201002/warning-cell-phone-radiation?currentPage=5

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...r-ban-of-cell-phones-and-wifi-in-schools.aspx

Apparently it is being taken somewhat seriously some places in Europe... I suppose that's my cursory translation of the links. I haven't done much more than skim them yet, personally.

 

[Olowkow]

This one is just scary:

http://aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.html

I'm starting to be a bit less skeptical about it.... but I'm not at all sure how sound this source is. It looks legit enough.

(ETA) This looks sort of woo-ish, however:



Yeah, it's all about the quantum uncertainty, you see. Sheesh, never mind.

ETA: We have a heck of a lot more than a little radio frequency energy in our pocket to worry about as a planet. I can't help but wonder how many wi-fiers "worry" about global climate.



Florian Emrich is in charge of Nuclear Waste disposal sites such as this one.

http://www.dw.de/living-above-germanys-old-nuclear-waste/a-16820648
A German law has recently come into effect ordering the cleanup of 126,000 barrels of radioactive waste at the Asse nuclear dump site. But it seems the process could take a lot longer than locals initially hoped for. ...

Emrich admits that the cleanup of the Asse mine will be a big challenge
"Actually, we get the feeling that relatively little is happening."
Emrich of the BfS says legislators have discussed the year 2033 as a possible cleanup date – but this isn't fixed.

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine appears to be a group of naturopaths. I looked up a few members at random from the drop down menu on the web page. I get the impression this is a meet up for naturopaths and holistic/alternative medicine types more so than any environmental medicine association.

The President of AAEM is Jeanette Hope, M.D. I think it might be more than coincidental that she too has discovered holistic/alternative medicine.

Her path to environmental medicine began with a personal experience with mold and mycotoxins in 2006 which led her to research available information on human illness resulting from exposure to water damaged buildings, mold and mycotoxins. Since this time she has studied environmental medicine and regularly attends conferences and courses in the field. She has had the opportunity to train onsite with many experts in environmental medicine. In addition to board certification in family practice and environmental medicine, Dr. Hope recently became board certified in integrative and holistic medicine.

I am Kirti Kalidas M.D., N.D. I am a Board Certified Internist and a Licensed Naturopathic Physician, licensed in the state of Oregon. My dual doctorate places me in a unique position to be able to truly integrate both conventional with natural medicine, thus being able to heal the whole person. [more]

Nelson Kraucak, MD, FAAFP-ABFT, APCT 352-750-4333 Fax: 352-750-2149 [email protected]Rheumatology, Sclerotherapy, Sexual Health, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Thyroid Disease, Weight Reduction, Women's Health, Wound Care, Yeast Syndrome, Holistic Medicine, Naturopathic Medicine, Heavy Metal Toxicity, and Low Dose Alergens

http://www.vitals.com/doctors/Dr_Tracey_Pinkston.html#ixzz2tQqF7HDZ
​

Rheumatology, Sclerotherapy, Sexual Health, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Thyroid Disease, Weight Reduction, Women's Health, Wound Care, Yeast Syndrome, Holistic Medicine, Naturopathic Medicine, Heavy Metal Toxicity, and Low Dose Alergens

ETA: Mixed up links.

​

 

[Mojo]

Same guys who are still stumbling on GMOs, next they might warn people not to use their microwaves?

Microwaves? What about light bulbs? They don't even have any shielding to stop the radiation getting out!

 

[Joey McGee]

Somebody I've been discussing this with on Facebook asked me to post a couple of links on the topic (he's been following along):

http://www.gq.com/cars-gear/gear-and-gadgets/201002/warning-cell-phone-radiation?currentPage=5

Here's a good rule of thumb in life, when someone starts talking about Plato's cave, you're about to hear some really stupid crap.

As the EPA puts it "The type of energy used in wireless technology is radio frequency (RF). RF radiation is non-ionizing. In other words, it is not strong enough to affect the structure of atoms it contacts."

If the staff at the national library of France told you that climate change had nothing to do with humans would you think that had any weight? Hopefully you'd look towards the community of climate scientists instead. Even looking at the opinions of meteorologists wouldn't be sufficient...

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...r-ban-of-cell-phones-and-wifi-in-schools.aspx

Similarly, the Council of Europe is not a scientific organization, not even close to a group of experts that could tell you the latest and applicable science on the subject.

People like Mercola can make hay with gullible readers saying "Ooo look! Some of those forward-thinking Europeans are scared of wifi!" But the best bet is to look to the world's foremost authorities...

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/iyh-vsv/prod/wifi-eng.php#a3

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RF energy as "possibly carcinogenic to humans". The IARC classification of RF energy reflects the fact that some limited evidence exists that RF energy might be a risk factor for cancer. However, the vast majority of scientific research to date does not support a link between RF energy exposure and human cancers. At present, the evidence of a possible link between RF energy exposure and cancer risk is far from conclusive and more research is needed to clarify this "possible" link. Health Canada is in agreement with both the World Health Organization and IARC that additional research in this area is warranted.

As long as RF energy levels remain below Health Canada's RF safety guidelines, current scientific evidence supports the assertion that RF energy emissions from Wi-Fi devices are not harmful. Health Canada's conclusions are consistent with the findings of other international bodies and regulators, including the World Health Organization, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the U.K. Health Protection Agency.

RF energy exposure from Wi-Fi equipment in all areas accessible to the general public are required to meet Health Canada's safety guidelines. The limits specified in the guidelines are far below the threshold for adverse health effects and are based on an ongoing review of thousands of published scientific studies on the health impacts of RF energy. The public exposure limits apply to everyone, including children, and allow for continuous, 24/7 exposure.

So more research is needed to iron out a very big "may" but they aren't exactly putting everything else on hold to look into it...