Parents Sue School Over Use of Wi-Fi Network

Iphtashu Fitz writes "Both news.com and Wired are reporting that an Illinois school district is being sued by parents over their use of a Wi-Fi network at a local elementary school. Apparently the parents of 5 students are concerned about potential health risks to their children by the Wi-Fi radio signals. The parents are seeking class-action status for their suit, which seeks to halt the use of wireless networks but does not ask for monetary damages. The complete complaint is also available for your reading pleasure on wifinetnews.com." I would never have guessed that the emissions from a wireless network are bad, unlike the healthy emissions given off by the now inescapable cell phones that are everywhere in public.

Comments

But these

[tarquin_fim_bim]

same brats carry mobile phones, I bet $2.

Sad

[captain_craptacular]

Unfortunately, the school district will now have to expend a significant amount of money to defend themselves against these bogus charges. Money that could otherwise be spent for some better cause such as, lets see, educating our children?

Re:Sad

[focitrixilous P]

You obviously haven't attended school in a while. This will probably get them a referendum to pay for the defense, as well as a hefty bonus for the superintendent who "saved the gift of technology for our children." Unfortunetly, the schools themselves get nothing but wifi.
Imagine 30 1st graders with laptops and 1 teacher. Or, imagine a beowulf cluster of broken laptops with snot on them, it's the same thing.

Re:Sad

[scoove]

expend a significant amount of money to defend themselves against these bogus charges

Unfortunately this appears to be what happens when you combine a society fixated with junk science with a political class ruled by trial attorneys.

The State of Missouri had an issue a bit more than a year ago with a state legislator that was trying to get all communication towers banned. The reason? "It might harm children." A few folks did some research on the legislator pushing the bill and guess who one of his largest financial supporters was? Incumbant local telephone companies (the competition to wireless providers). Save the children unfortunately has become code for political and legal system payola.

Unfortunately this poster touches on the reality of the current US legal nightmare: many defendents cannot afford the fight for what is right due to the complete lack of financial accountability of irresponsible plantiff attorneys and their clients. I'm predicting the school will back out and turn off their wireless devices. Their students will lack the access to information that other students might have. Unless other parents get vocal and oppose this luddite activity, they'll further the progress of their children towards a future job at Burger King.

Per the allegation that the school has been ignoring evidence that electromagnetic radiation from Wi-Fi networks poses health risks, I'd invite the luddite parents and their attorneys to have a radiofrequency engineer show them what the airwaves in the classroom (or better, at home) look like. 802.11b/a/g is background noise compared to many of the narrowband signals out there. Better shut off the FM, AM and TV broadcasters immediately. Throw away that cellphone (you don't hold that anywhere *near* your head, do you?) Better start packing candles in the kids lunch bag... those fluorescent lights are little RF monsters ("to quote: while the intentional radiation of fluorescent light tubes lies in the visible light range, such tubes also generate very low levels of microwave and RF white noise (Mumford, 1949)... microwaves? That's not a classroom lit by fluorescents, it's a Easy Bake Oven from Hell!). Lock up the school TV sets - what do you think that gunnplexer is firing at your eyeballs? Get weather, aviation and police radar shut off immediately (sure hope that speeder doesn't crash into the school bus). And god forbid you have one of those Air Force E-4B 747's fly over your home as they do mine... one of those bastards wipes out my TV amplifier every time it flies over my farm! Heck, we haven't even thought about RF experiments like HAARP that can probably melt a human in milliseconds!

Of course, the final step for the trial attorneys and their luddite clients will be banning the ultimate producer of raw RF. Once that's done, we can all rest assured that no RF deathrays will harm us.

*scoove*

Re:Sad

[dattaway]

Light dimmers and motor controllers are major offenders found around the house that would put a shielded microwave oven to shame.

We better shut off the electric grid. Start thinking of the children for God's sake.

Re:Sad

[NanoGator]

"Per the allegation that the school has been ignoring evidence that electromagnetic radiation from Wi-Fi networks poses health risks, I'd invite the luddite parents and their attorneys to have a radiofrequency engineer show them what the airwaves in the classroom (or better, at home) look like."

It'd be amusing (though unlikely) if the school filed child abuse charges with the parents who brought up the case, citing that they owned cell phones.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Lighting dimmers (the typical type used in homes) are NOT rheostats!

A typical (cheap) lighting dimmers is rated for about 600 watts of connected load. (You can get fancier ones rates for 1200 watts or more.) A rheostat capable of handling a 600 watt load is about 8" in diameter and 2" thick! (Hint: it wouldn't fit in the little rectangular J box used for home light switches and dimmers. Not to mention the fact that a high power rheostat dissipates the unused electrical current as heat - something it couldn't possibly do if crammed into a J box on a wall surrounded by fiberglass insulation.)

So how does the typical home lighting dimmer work, you ask? Well, it uses a solid state switch known as a TRIAC and a technique known as "phase control" to chop up the AC waveform. Basically, a timer circuit is reset at zero crossing (the start of an AC half cycle) and waits for a portion of the half cycle before switching on the TRIAC. If the delay is equal to one half of the half cycle, half the AC waveform is delivered to the connected lights, which glow at about half brightness.

A waveform with a relatively sharp edge is created when the TRIAC switches on part way through the AC cycle meaning lots of harmonics which ultimately means the wire running from the dimmer out to the lights acts as antennas and spew out the upper harmonics as RF / EMI. The harmonics are greatest when the half cycles are chopped in half (when the dimmer is set at approximately high brightness) - if you listen closely lighting dimmers buzz (mechanical vibration due to the lower harmonics) and you will actually notice this buzzing is at its worst around half brightness.

There is a related (patented) technique called reverse phase control that is built around a relatively new type of switching transistor called an IGBT. Same basic idea but (as the name implies) in reverse - instead of the half cycle starting in the off state and switching on part way through, it starts in the on state and switches off part way through. The elimination of the sharp turn on edge significantly reduces the harmonics generated.

The reverse phase control patent is owned by the Rosco theatrical products company (used in their IPS lighting control systems.) You can imagine that the harmonics generated by a typical theatrical lighting system (often up to 100,000 watts of lighting being controlled) can be a serious problem. (So much of a problem that electrical panels with oversized neutral buses are required to prevent the neutrals from melting and special power factor correcting transformers are required to prevent this noise from contaminating the rest of the AC system.) Anyway, the reverse phase control eliminates most of this problem - it also results in smaller equipment cabinets, less fan noise due to lower heat production, etc. Pretty neat.

Re:Sad

[AZhun]

And the old 50s floriscopes used for shoe fitting killed millions!

Yes, they were dangerous and yes, they did damage; it is the extreme other side (well, except for guys going on shoreleave thinking that the new RADAR thing would kill sperm or diseases so thay'd buy time in front of the energized antenna - zap -- God some of your people hold down the low end of the bell curve!)

Yes, your points are well placed. Examples of de-evolution. Here is more.

From the radicals demonstrating in '68 came the death of Eisenhower's education initiative for Scientific and Engineering education post-Sputniki. As steps were taken not to make'm too brite no mor. Dey hump rifle, go 10 bang-bang real good den.

What we see are ever lowered standards since 1968.

Follow the trends most of the textbooks are from an approved list coming out of some bent Texas board. McGuffy readers from the one room schoolhouse up through the later 19th Century are better. Than the bent askewed stuff now.

Want to have fun: download the Ontario standards and class cirriculum for High School it reads like most 4-year liberal arts degree down here.

Its not that they're so smart it what ours was in the heavy industry areas like the Rust Belt and New England because you couldn't get a job, keep the factories going or build new enterprises without it. Let alone enage in the Cold War.

Of course since coming to AZ from the rust belt I am still in shock -- as here as near as I can tell Arizona exists to make Mississippi and Alabama look good.

Why these lame lawsuits -- education and knowledge has been replaced by myth and ignorance.

On the Republic's gravestone: THEY GAVE IT AWAY.

Umm??

[dcstimm]

2.4ghz Cordless phones use the same freq! What are these parents smoking?

Re:Umm??

[japhyr777]

Wait until they find out about Baby Monitors... That'll get them worked up..

All those hours of the day the poor baby was taking in the radio waves. Possibly right next to it's head. Bzzzzt..

Re:Umm??

[GammaTau]

2.4ghz Cordless phones use the same freq! What are these parents smoking?

I don't know... but whatever it is, don't tell the kids. It might be bad influence.

Re:Umm??

[SKPhoton]

I'd like to see the results of some wifi-crazed person setting up pringles cans and pointing them in all sorts of directions and sitting in front of the cans for hours on end.

Re:Umm??

[Exiler]

Well, for one thing they'd be pretty confused. "All these cans and my signal STILL doesn't reach?!"

Re:Umm??

[r.future]

I do tech support for Belkin and I get no fewer than about 4-6 calls per day (I take 35-40 calls in an 8 hour shift)where a person will say something such as

"my wireless card will stop working randomly for no reason all the time."

The first question out of my mouth is do you have any cordless phones? When they say yes, I ask if they are 2.4GHz or 900MHz

if/when the person says "it's a 2.4" and I tell them that their phone will cause some interference most people are absolutely shocked.

Anyway, it's a great point to make, I wonder if it will come up in the court case.

I can just see the lawyer for the school district pointing out that the parents use the same technology that they think is so unsafe in thir homes.


-r.future

I guess they should sue the FCC, too.

[fruity1983]

For allowing the use of cellphones, FM and AM radio, wireless telephones and hey! How about power lines, too?

Welcome to the 21st

[agent dero]

This is the 21st century, radio, UV, and all sorts of electromagnetic waves float around us. These schools are not sticking unborn fetuses in microwaves, they are simply putting up a radio network.

Why not sue the sun because it's barraging Earth with all these bad rays, sue cell phone companies for placing cellphone towers where your children may be. Sue HOT 95.5! for transmitting that crappy music.

Go get your aluminum foil beanie already.

Tinfoil hats

[Carnildo]

Does anyone have the address of these people? I've got a load of tinfoil hats they can use to protect their children!

Re:Tinfoil hats

[nsample]

The parent post is a pretty funny comment, and one that should be appreciated by the majority of the /. readers. However, as a new parent, a scientist, and a PhD, I'll admit that I too have worries about WiFi and growing children. And I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

We had a WiFi network in-home before my son was born, but removed it during my wife's pregnancy. We *still* have a cordless phone, but stepped back to 900MHz. Why? Well, there's enough evidence out there to say that it's worth it to worry. We don't have a complete story, and that's the issue. Unfortunately, there were no equivalent localized high frequency sources in homes and schools 30 years ago. We don't have enough data to say definitively one way or another that something's safe or not.

And that's what scares the shit out of parents. We don't know enough to rule anything out yet. I know enough that I wouldn't live next to a cell tower, even though I'll risk holding a cell phone to my ear just about everyday. However, when it comes to my kids, I don't take that chance.

Re:Tinfoil hats

[metamatic]

I assume you don't have a microwave oven. Even with the shielding, those things leak enough microwaves to drown out a WiFi network.

Re:Tinfoil hats

[alienw]

If your cellphone functions inside the house, you are getting roughly as much (or more) RF from the tower as from a WiFi point. Now factor in all the other sources (satellites, microwave ovens, walkie-talkies, nearby cellphones, communcication towers, police radio, pagers, regular radio and so on). Obviously, a single wifi point does not matter much.

Re:Tinfoil hats

[tgibbs]

Well, there's enough evidence out there to say that it's worth it to worry.

I would be more worried about flying saucers, for which there is about the same level of evidence. And there certainly is not enough evidence to rule them out as a danger, either. The good studies of non-ionizing radiation show no effect, the studies that show harm are small and generally show tiny effects of marginal statistical significance under circumstances where there are numerous potential artifacts and biases. And it is very hard to come up with even a remotely plausible hypothesis for how non-ionizing radiation could be harmful at all--and if it was, how one such source could make an appreciable difference considering the large number of sources in our society.

Re:Tinfoil hats

[theonetruekeebler]

Welcome to being a new parent in a new era, because you're certainly talking like a parent rather than a scientist: "We don't have enough data to say definitively one way or another that something's safe or not." Safety is the absence of danger, and when is there ever enough data to prove the absence of a phenomenon? And thirty years ago, between your 1960s color television and the flourescent lights in the supermarket where your mother, pregnant with you, filled up her cart with fatty, chemical-laced foods, you were being exposed to a hell of a lot more radiation that your Wi-Fi, and believe me that's the least of the environmental poisons you were exposed to in 1973. Yet you still managed to grow up to get a PhD.

There's a lot of money to be made by scaring the shit out of you. When it comes to technology, the magic words are "there is not enough evidence that this product is safe". Remember when they were screaming that power lines were killing babies? Remember when saccharin was killing babies? Remember when Y2K was going to kill all of us and our babies?

Try this: "There may be a link between measles vaccinations and autism". Okay? Now, wrap your scientist mind around that word "may". It means non-zero probability, so good luck disproving the proposition. And I hope your math skills are up to the task of comparing the "may" above to the "may" in "measles vaccinations may prevent measles", because I made that up about autism. Scared you, though, didn't I? So welcome to the new era of parenting.

And the fearmongers are never going to shut up. Twenty year studies that turn up no statistically significant link between their pet fear and reality obviously didn't look long enough or hard enough. They like the attention, and their lawyers like the money.

Re:Tinfoil hats

[BenEnglishAtHome]

There's a lot of money to be made by scaring the shit out of you.

Truer words were never spoken. I remember when I first woke up to this fact. I was just a kid, watching Donohue's talk show. He was interviewing people who were imploring the public to be more cognizant of the possibility that their kids could go missing. Without specifics, they were giving the impression that there were pervy kidnappers around every corner, just waiting to snatch your kids, abuse them in unspeakable ways, and then sell them into sexual slavery.

Then one of the guests said that 50,000 kids go missing every year and something clicked in my brain. It may have been the fact that this guy dropped such a horrible statistic and the program then cut to a PSA for the organization he represented, a PSA begging for donations. But, more likely, I think it was that the Vietnam war had not been long over and we'd had 50,000 casualties in that war. Everyone knew someone with a family member hurt or killed in Vietnam. But I didn't know anyone whose kid had been snatched off a playground by some old man in a dirty raincoat.

I did some research. The horrifically inflated figures the guy was spouting included runaways, throwaways, kids living with non-custodial spouses, and a huge measure of just plain old exaggeration. The best data that I could find, from the Illinois State Police (the first law enforcement agency to really study the problem) was that true, non-family, non-ransom, oh-my-God-some-perv-just-grabbed-my-little-boy-off -the-playground abductions happened somewhere between 50 and 150 times a year in the U.S.

That's really bad. I'd be willing to give money to any organization that could help put a dent in that problem. But any organization that feels the need to pander for donations by scaring the crap out of everyone gets nada from me.

Of course, those of you old enough to remember will recall that in the late 1970s through the mid-1980s, the fear-mongerers won. We went through a long period where the media would have had us believe that Satanic child molestors were everywhere. Thank goodness everyone eventually realized that was all a bunch of bunk. Now, we've settled down to just a simple, constant state of excess paranoia.

What a waste of money

[doomdog]

Schools are always short of money -- not enough for textbooks, teachers, better facilities, computer upgrades, etc... And now they're being forced to spend money on lawyers to defend themselves against a lawsuit brought up by a few ignorant parents??? Yeah, that's a great way to spend the education budget...

If we had serious tort reform in this country where the losing party had to pay the legal expenses of the winner, these kinds of stupid lawsuits would never be filed in the first place...

Ugh

[c0dedude]

The plantiffs claim to have over 400 articles about the harmful effects of radiation such as WiFi, yet cite 0. I know this is just the beginning of the case, but this seems like a scare tactic, get rid of it and lose $0 or we'll keep going and you'll lose more. The basis of the scientific method is query and data replicability. If you don't query and produce not one datum, you aren't scientifically proving anything, you're making a political statment. The style, but not the substance, of this article, troubles me greatly.

This is beyond ridiculous

[MoceanWorker]

Only in this country would you expect to find people sueing a person/company/organization/etc.. for such trivial nonsense.

As I type this post right now, the monitor in my room, my radio, lights, cell phone, speakers are all giving off radiation. Not to mention, objects in my room (i.e. fork) are strengthening these signals.

Radiation is around us.. everywhere.. We can't stop it. The big question on hand is, do we sacrifice technology and all its benefits for the risk of potential radition which may or may not hinder ones health and/or possibly lead to cancer?

Please, out of all those parents sueing.. how many of them smoke, have 5 TV's in their house, drive a car, use a computer, etc.. you get my drift.

I hope there's somebody out there in Illinois who can smack those parents around a bit.. and I think I say this for most of the /.'ers..

Re:This is beyond ridiculous

[RayBender]

There is nothing irrational about not wanting GM foods.

It's irrational to avoid GM foods, simply because they are GM. There may be specific instances of GM foods that are bad for you (e.g. if you're allergic to peanuts, and it has a peanut gene spliced in), but to avoid the entire class of food because "it's unnatural" simply shows a lack of biological understanding. Do you avoid all plants that were cross-bred, or selectively bred?

Cluelessness

[deglr6328]

I wonder how quickly these idiots ran to their portable phones to call their lawyers in order to file this frivolous lawsuit. It's ironic that these people who are supposed to be products of an educational system which teaches basic science(for instance, oh I don't know....the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation) is now actively participating in the promotion of their children's scientific illiteracy. Horay for the triumph of knee jerk emotional reaction over rational analysis!!

Re:Cluelessness

[ejaw5]

I recently got the privledge to try out the Tech International's CellSensor (http://www.techintlcorp.com/cellsensor.htm).

It measures Cellular radiation (range: .1-10 mW/cm2) and EMF radiation (range: 1-50 milliGauss).
I measured a Nokia 3360 of emitting ~8 mW/cm2 Cellular radiation and over 50 milliGauss EMF (outside the sensor's range). What else gives off 50+ milliGauss? 5.1 receiver, microwave in operation. Refrigerator gives off ~35 milliGauss and a table fan gives off ~40 milliGauss.

I didn't have a Wi-Fi device to measure, but yea, why don't they sue Pioneer, Panasonic, Whirlpool, Kenmore, et al while their at it. And if they're genuinely concerned, there's a number of things they should get out of their homes.

Well...

[spoonist]

I would bet serious money that these are a bunch of Soccer Moms who drive like freakin' maniacs in their minivans and feed their fat lethargic kids fast food.

"Oooh... I don't want my child hurt by WiFi."

Meanwhile they're driving their freakin' POS minivan at 90 mph down the freeway zig zagging in and out of traffic as if they were driving a sports car while screaming at their morbidly obese kids in the back who are stuffing their faces full of fast food.

And you're worried about WiFi? Come on.

Sorry for the rant. I just had to get that off my chest. Yeah, maybe these parents are very health conscious... I dunno...

I assume then...

[El]

that these same parents never use baby monitors, cell phones, cordless phones, microwave ovens, or cathode ray tubes, as these all emit radio waves which pose a risk to their children? And that their houses are also sheilded against stray RF from power lines, the Sun, and even outer space? In other words, they must live in caves with only a wood fire for heat and light?

They should become Amish

[retro128]

I suspect that once they heard that WiFi uses the same frequencies as microwave ovens they got worried. Too bad the power output of WiFi at the antenna is 1/10000th of what a microwave runs at. Maybe they should sue to shut down all radio stations, all cell networks, all electrical stations, and all TV's.

The parents need to be clued in on some wonderful news: It's impossible to escape RF radiation. As a beginning electronics hobbyist, one day I was playing with my new oscilloscope and touched the metal part of the probe, and a very rough waveform came up on the screen. Wondering what it was, and having a hunch, I plugged my function generator into the secondary inputs and set it to 60Hz sine, and guess what, they matched. My body was acting as a giant antenna for the RF waves coming off the electrical lines in my house. I'd write more, but I've decided to sue Socal Edison.

As if that LAST LAWSUIT WASNT PETTY ENOUGH

[falcon5768]

I have a feeling this one is going to go just about as far as the electric lines over the school deal did.

Lawyer "There is no tests that prove they are safe"

Judge "You use your cellphone about once every half hour right?"

Lawyer "Yeah"

Judge "Have you gotten a tumor yet?"

Lawyer "No"

Judge "There's your proof its safe asshole"

course if only the real world was this easy

They have no idea

[jcsehak]

My father works on the electronics systems on the latest military aircraft, and he mentioned once, a year or so ago, that one had a box that would report on all the different signals coming in through the air -- radio, TV, cell phones, whatever; and when he turned it on without any filters, the screen just kept scrolling. He couldn't believe how many there were.

I have to wonder that if someone evolved to be able to percieve more than just the visible light spectrum or regular sound waves, they'd go crazy, thinking they heard voices in their head. Then I have to wonder if at least some people who are "crazy" don't simply percieve some of these signals, and their brains don't know how to process the information.

So easily resolved....

[KoshClassic]

Wouldn't it be much simpler for the parents simply to have their children wear hats made from aluminum foil? :)

Oak Park District 97

[Infonaut]

Based on the "About Us" info found here, this is an upscale, academically successful school district located in the 'burbs west of Chicago.

I wonder if the parents of students in the inner city are laughing or crying when they read about this lawsuit. "Hah! Our kids have a tough time getting textbooks, and the parents in Oak Park are worried about wireless networks?!"

Re:they worry about THIS?!

[wo1verin3]

Little billy's immunization record ..... aren't really super-sensitive information.

You don't consider personal health information sensitive? That disturbs me.

Dateline--Backwoods, AL

[Jouster]

Backwoods, AL--A group of parents in this small town, calling itself "Citizens for Safer Classrooms", is suing their school district over the installation of what they call "massive portals designed solely for the purpose of subjecting our children to radiation." They claim these portals (which the school district contends are called "windows") are made of material carefully selected to ensure the maximum range of radiation is hitting their children.

"Well, I think it's an outrage," said Patti Jo, a mother of two children in the school district and one of the plaintiffs in the suit. "It's becoming more and more obvious that they're maliciously subjecting our little boys and girls to a whole host of EMR [electro-magnetic radiation], simply so they can save a few pennies on their electricity bill." She started to cry softly. "We intend to petition for a criminal trial, too. We're claiming it's premeditated murder. The school board should fry," she added.

Although both sides are trying to reach an agreement on how best to contain the situation, a school board member we contacted, speaking on condition of anonymity, was resolute. "Sure, they get a little UV radiation burned at times," the anonymous boardmember stated. "But have you looked at the cost of fluorescent tubes lately?"

Punitive damages, if the plaintiffs succeed, are expected to be in the millions.

Jouster

Re:Stupid Parents

[mOoZik]

Why does this surprise you? The average person is a moron. Yes, I said. The average person doesn't understand technology and its effects at the same level that /.ers do. They get their information from the mainstream news, which equally is stupid and irresponsible and instills fear in people for ratings. What a wonderful world we live in, eh? A world of ignorance.

WHAT?!

[MrScience]

This is insane. My company rolled out 802.11 a while ago, and they had a few statistics they sent out to address safety concerns.

Stuff like, "Since these run at low transmit power (.03 Watts), it's 1/10-1/20 the power of a cell phone." and "You'd have to hold a body part within 2cm of the antena for 30 minutes while the radio operated continuously at 100% capacity for that time."

Just look at IEEE C95.1 1991, which details the maximum safe exposure for any EM radiation.

Or, gosh, here's a thought... what about OSHA?! They've got a bazillion links on the research involved.

I hope this gets thrown out of the courts faster than you can blink. The last thing students need is to be shoved back into the backwaters of technology.

People fear what they don't understand

[xtal]

Given the incredible lack of information taught in public schools about RF and electromagnetic energy, this doesn't suprise me. People think that wireless data communication is like magic. Science programs glaze over even the most basic introduction to electromagnetics. I don't think I even had an iota of a introduction to the topic until I started university in an Electrical Engineering program. How many people could answer the basic question: How are EM waves produced? (Or rather, why are they produced?")

I hope these parents get smacked down, because there is far more RF energy coming from other sources. What they MIGHT want to be concerned about is the placement of electical substation transformers for the power grid. Would they like to teach schools without electricity?

Ignorance brought us great things like witch burning and the inquisitions. I hope this doesn't turn into one..

Re:I wonder how many parents ...

[tomstdenis]

Well there has to be RF leak, see jackass electrons going though wire makes a magnet field...RF low and behold is essentially many electrons going over a wire called an "antenna".

Now a 2.4Ghz clock over the copper inside a cpu would be a 2.4Ghz RF signal [or a multiple of it]

Good thing you finished yer grade 8 science...

Are all trolls on /. this stupid or just you specifically?

Tom

They don't need wifi, though

[localghost]

I might care more about this if the district had a legitimate use for wifi. It's an elementary school district, grades K-8. None of the students have laptops, and the majority of the teachers are incapable of using anything other than Internet Explorer, Microsoft Word and Gradequick.

Now the high school, on the other hand, could benefit from wifi. One student in my math class recently got a tablet PC, and we were talking a couple days ago about how nice it would be if there was a school-wide 802.11b network. Unfortunarly, our school is way behind the times as far as technology goes. We watched laserdiscs the other day in psych.

Money isn't an issue for either of them, though. Both the elementary schools and the high school have more money then they know what to do with. The middle schools just built two new buildings, and the high school got a new $3 million artificial turf football field, an artificial turf soccer field with stadium lighting, and built a parking garage. The issues are stupid parents and stupid administration.

(In case you couldn't tell, I attended the district the lawsuit was filed against)

come on

[MegaFur]

Are Wi-Fi signals all that different from standard radio signals? Aren't all of us being bombarded by stuff like this all the time that we're able to listen to good tunes on our AM/FM radios in our car?

I mean--I am basically clueless here--what's the issue? Is it the wavelength or what?

Okay, here's me actually clicking on some links, and I get this:

The Wi-Fi Alliance says Wi-Fi networks are safe. The radio waves in a Wi-Fi network use the same frequency as wireless home phones, and have one-thirtieth the power of cordless phones, said Grimm, the spokesman for the group.

Now the only catch is that's from the Wi-Fi alliance and they cannot be taken to be entirely neutral in this affair. Can anyone not associated with them back them up on this claim? Is a Wi-Fi network really the same frequency as wireless home phones but 1/30 the power? 'Cause if so, I think we can just chock this one up to Standard American Paranoia (Concerned Mom Flavor) and move on.

simple solution

[Casca]

There is a simple solution to this really. The geek kids all need to get together and kick the shit out of the kids whos parents are suing. Damnit, nevermind...

RTFA

[BlueboyX]

Sorry, but they are seeking $. The pdf outlinging their wannabe class action suit does include "injunctive relief," as well as "other and further relief" immediately after "threatened immediate, irreparable harm." Further up they clearify what they think this harm is "threatened with irreparable harm by Defendants' conduct in that they have been exposed to grave health risks, many of which lead to permament injury, disease and death."

That is the language you use when you are trying to get a few $million per kid. They are indeed seeking vast amounts of money, which is the only sane reason for this suit to begin with.

"Meat" of complaint

[SeanAhern]

For those too lazy (I almost was) to read the text of the complaint, I'll include the relevant portions here:

Specifically, the Defendants have installed wireless networks in each of the school buildings under its jurisdiction. In so doing, the Defendants have ignored the substantial body of evidence that high frequency electro-magnetic radiation poses substantial and serious health risks, particularly to growing children.

And later:

16. In fact, there is a substantial and growing body of scientific literature studying and outlining the serious health risks that exposure to low intensity, but high radio frequency (RF) radiation poses to human beings, particularly children. For example, responsible scientists have reported that prolonged exposure to low intensity RF radiation can break down DNA strands, cause chromosome aberrations and break down the blood-brain barrier, thereby permitting toxic proteins to invade the brain. And, these occur at radiation levels below what a child would be exposed to by sitting in front of a computer on a wireless network.

17. Other researchers have observed other potential health risks that they believe are traceable to exposure to low intensity RF radiation at levels that are at or below the levels that children would experience by using wireless LANs in a classroom. In fact, at present, the lawyers for the Plaintiffs and their clients have collected more than 400 scientific articles, summaries and references outlining health risks from low intensity RF radiation exposure, all or most of which have been researched and written after 1995. By way of example only, attached as Exhibit 2 is a listing and a summary of thirty-one articles, all of which deal with the potential health risks from prolonged exposure to low intensity RF radiation, i.e., radiation given off by, among other things, wireless LANs.

And finally:

19. Defendants have stated publicly that they have examined the current, prevailing government regulations relating to safety of wireless technology and the system installed in District 97 poses no health risks to humans. This statement is false. The only U.S. standards that relate in any way to radiation exposure were developed by the F.C.C. before 1993 and relate only to thermal radiation. The radiation that Plaintiffs object to here is non-thermal and the federal government has not promulgated any standards relating to this.

literacy != knowledge

[BlueboyX]

The people who started this suit were probably literate but rather stupid if they believe that WiFi is magically evil. In the modern world, literacy is merely the beginning of education. You learn how to read so that you can study more.

*sigh*

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

Actually, compared to the amount of RF energy travelling through most homes, WiFi *IS* background radiation. You don't need a fancy source for that. All you need is a little technical data.

WiFi is limited to 80mW or less of power output. The leakage alone from a 900W microwave oven is considerably higher than this, and in the exact same frequency spectra. The power output of radar of various types dwarfs either, although the distance normally provides some protection (inverse squares and all). And don't even ask about the output from a 20,000W AM radio station.

The X-Rays from an average CRT (including that television set) are much more harmful, since, unlike the microwave radiation used by the above, X-Rays are ionizing radiation and *DO* cause cellular mutations (basically, anything longer wave than UV, including visible light and microwaves, doesn't have the energy to ionize the cells in a human body (photoelectric effect), anything shorter wave (including the deadly UVC, X-rays, and Gamma rays) will ionize cells, break down DNA, and other wonderful things).

Tinfoil hats...

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

... might be useless against alien mindprobes or whatever it is that conspiracy theorists keep ranting about, but they do work pretty nicely to block radio waves, especially at higher frequencies.

So just have the paranoid parents send their kids to school wrapped up like a baked potato. Sure, the resulting bullying might be unhealthy, but the kid won't be exposed to the evil 2.4GHz radiation.

Re:I wonder how many parents ...

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

Well, technically speaking, if all the wires in the CPU are treated like transmission lines and properly terminated, the emission should be negligable. It's only when you have traces resonating at the clock rate that problems occur.

That said, modern clock distribution nets look more like big grid antennai with massive amplifiers (several watts of the 70W that an average CPU uses goes to clock distribution) powering it. So it does radiate quite substantially.

Re:Let's Take Some Action

[gangien]

Why has slashdot posted home addresses and stuff so much lately? I mean it's one thing for that spammer and for the Telemarketers and such. But for this? what the hell? even if the lawsuit is ridiculus, how the hell does that give you a right to post personal information? and i'm not talking about whether this is legal or not.

Purity of Essence

[Latent Heat]

There was a time when it was the right-wing nuts who were charging every kind of conspiracy and risk to health. Remember fluoride in water and how the issue was lampooned in Dr. Strangelove?

I had a libertarian friend who liked to poke fun both at the right-wing nuts who were upset about fluoride along with the liberals who were in a big huff about how bad the conservatives were. He offered up the "fluoron" theory: fluorescent light bulbs emitted "fluorons", subatomic particles smaller than an electron so they were not yet detected by science, but they were shaped like a hammer and sickle (the Soviet emblem), and if one penetrated your skull it would explode a brain cell and turn it into a Communist idealogue. Light exposure (small number of Commie brain cells) turned you into a liberal while heavy doses turned you into a pinko -- and fluorescent lights were everywhere in public schools and government buildings.

I guess we have come full circle and now the loony Left has become what the loony Right once was.

Why the fuck weren't these parents sterilized?

[fmaxwell]

People that mind-numbingly stupid should have their children forcibly taken away by the state and put up for adoption. Then the parents should be sterilized so that they don't breed again.

In the meantime, science teachers throughout the school district should be telling their classes that these parents are examples of morons who have no understanding of science.

Re:Why the fuck weren't these parents sterilized?

[fmaxwell]

Explain, since when is any form of electromagnetic radiation not harmful?

You're right! Quick: Run around your house and unplug your lamps, flourescent lights, computer, television, cordless phone, microwave oven, anything with an electric motor, since they all emit electromagnetic radiation.

Low band low energy radio is not very harmful while high energy gamma rays aren quite harmful.

So let's just extrapolate from gamma radiation to WiFi networks. That's good science.

Wifi is pretty energetic so has the capability to dislodge atomic structures and hence arguably is carcinogenic.

Then show us reputable, peer-reviewed studies published in reputable medical journals like The Lancet or New England Journal of Medicine that bear out your theory when it comes to the low-power 802.11 networks that we're talking about here.

Next time when you talk about sterilization for stupidity include a clause that when in retrospect you are the stupid one they can stop your machinery from working...

That was implied from the beginning. But there's no chance of that happening any time soon because, unlike you, I value science more than google results that show up a bunch of blog entries from pseudo-science nutcases.

Have you ever used google like for http://www.google.se/search?q=radiation+wifi+healt h

Have you ever used Google like for http://www.google.com/search?q=aliens+roswell+UFO.

Run for your lives! The extraterrestrials have landed on the Earth.

Re:Why the fuck weren't these parents sterilized?

[calethix]

Don't worry, the wi-fi network will surely sterilize their children so the stupidity will stop there. ;)

To the parents.

[CrazyDuke]

Dear Parents;

We at your local public schools appreciate your concerns over the installation of a radio frequencey AKA wireless or wifi computer network. Since we have become aware of your concern over the exposure of children to radiation, we have studied the situation in ernest to better understand your concerns.

We have decided henseforth, that no wireless network access will be available at the local schools.

In addition, during our research, we have discovered more sources of potentially harmful radiation, many even more dangerous. We appologize for our negligence; And keeping in mind your concerns with this problem, we are immediately initiating steps to stop these dead rays from damaging the lives of our children. In the interest of openness, we are providing a list of these steps so that we may recieve constuctive feedback from the community. They are:

1. Effective immediatly, all electronic devices of any type are banned. This includes all computers, calculators, air conditioners, heaters, ovens, refrigerators, electric pencil sharpeners, electronic office equipment, lighting (which is notorious for the amounts of radiation it emits), smoke alarms (which also have significant amounts of Americium-241, a highly radioactive metal in the same group as Uranium and Plutonium), and communications devices. In addition:
- Cell phones, cordless phones, walky talkies, and all other cordless electronic communication equipment are considered weapons. Possession
of such weapons will result in immediate expulsion and immediate contact with the appropriate authorities.
- Children with pacemakers, motorized artificial limbs, or other electronic health assistance will be required to attend a special school for radioactive children located off the main school grounds. Parents possesing any of the afformentioned equipment are banned from school grounds.

2. We will be disconnecting from the power grid, telephone network, and cable network immediately in order to curb radio frequency radation that is emitted from even the wires themselves.

3. The school will be renovated with aluminum and lead radiation sheilding in order to protect the children from extraterrestrial radiation including x-rays and gamma rays. We would appreciate donations so that we may purchase the lead required to construct a 1 meter (approximately 3 foot) thick dome over the school in order to make sure none of this radiation harms the children.

4. Since busses contain electronic components that emit radiation themselves, all bussing services are to be halted. All students are required to walk or ride a bicycle to school while wearing lead radiation sheilding.

5. Parents who are suspected of exposing students to the above radiation sources shall be refered to social services for further investigation.

Thank you for bringing this grave matter to our attention. We will continue to take all the steps necessary to keep the children safe and protected.

Sincerely;

XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

(It's funny! Laugh!)

It's simple

[CitizenJohnJohn]

These parents just need to send their kids to school in smaller versions of their own tin-foil beanies.

Re:please, please countersue

[Mr. Slippery]

They are trying to steal away educational tools from their children!

Outside of programming, engineering, and clerical skills classes, computers are not educational tools - educational tools must actually be useful for education.

Computers in the classroom are a wonderful distraction, and they give politicians something to point at and say "See my commitment to education!" But they do fsck-all to enhance learning.

Clifford Stoll's book High Tech Heretic" is a good look at the subject.

Is 802.11b transmitting all the time?

[dusty123]

Although I'm not very concerned about health risks, I would like to know if a 802.11b access point transmits a signal also if no client is connected.

I read somewhere that the AP transmits an idle signal (10khz) all the time.

On the other hand my AP (Cisco) can shut off SSID broadcasting. It is said that AP's without SSID broadcasting cannot be detected by programs like "airsnort" and the like if no client is connected. So this would hint that there is no transmission at all if SSID broadcasting is shut off and the AP is idle.

If this is true and the WLAN is only very infrequently used (as in this school) this would make the claim even more ridiculous.

what's the frequency kenneth ...?

[pbhj]

It's not about the quantity it's about the frequency.

2.4GHz microwave radiation causes water molecules to resonate (I can't remember whether it's the bond angle or length at this frequency - this is how microwave ovens work, I digress). We humans are mainly water. Hence microwaves _at_the_right_frequency_ have an effect on our molecules too.

So microwaves at _this_frequency_ are a concern. But low frequency radio waves are not. It's just like the whole sun-screen (suntan lotion) thing. As long as you block the UV rays you're OK. You don't need to block all light frequencies.

Evidence is limited and what evidence there is suggests negligible effects ... but you choose the risk in your own home.

A wifi network is pervasive and always on. Would you sit your child in front of a working microwave oven all day?

Also, assuming the folk are naively using equipement that operates at this frequency and assuming that this radiation is damaging. That doesn't mean that when they know about something that is spitting out this frequency then they can't complain. It just means they need to be educated a little about the other dangers. [Remember assumptions, I'm hypothesising here].

Re:I wonder how many parents ...

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

Considering how many kilometers of wire the average clock distribution net contains, it easily might be a design factor. The real issue is still one of poor termination, though, because even without resonance you can still radiate quite a bit of power.