Slashdot Mirror


BBC Rules That Wi-Fi Radiation Findings Were Wrong

Stony Stevenson writes "A Panorama programme claiming that Wi-Fi creates three times as much radiation as mobile phone masts was 'misleading', an official BBC complaints ruling has found. The team involved in the research came under fire from the school where the 'investigations' were held for scaremongering, but now the BBC has come out with an official ruling. 'The programme included only one contributor (Professor Repacholi) who disagreed with Sir William, compared with three scientists and a number of other speakers (one of whom was introduced as a former cancer specialist) who seconded his concerns.'"

7 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. The BBC you say... by da3dAlus · · Score: 5, Funny

    The programme included only one contributor (Professor Repacholi) who disagreed with Sir William

    Peter Griffin: We'll move to England, huh? Worst they got there is, you know, drive-by... arguments...
    [Meanwhile, in England]
    Englishman: I say, Jeremy, isn't that Reginald B. Stifworth, the young upstart chap who's been touting the merits of a united European commonwealth?
    Jeremy: Why yes, I daresay it is.
    Englishman: Oh, let's get him.
    [They drive up]
    Englishman: Oh Reginald... I disagree.
    [drives off]

    --

    Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
  2. Can't these people do maths?! by ericferris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am sick and tired of hearing voodoo science scaremongers. So here we go.

    As far as possible interactions with the human body go, the 900 MHz to 1900 MHz spectrum is roughly the same. Both WiFi and cell phones use bursts of transmissions with approximately the same spectral characteristics. So we can simplify the problem and focus only on intensity.

    A cell phone that is far from the nearest tower can transmit up to one watt. A typical home router transmits 100 mW (one tenth of a cell phone). A very powerful cell tower transmits 1000 W. However, signal intensity per surface unit decreases as the square of the distance. So if you are 100 meters (300 feet, one-half furlong for our US friends) from a 1-kW cell tower, you get the same exposure as if you are one metter (0.005 furlong, 3 ft) from a wifi router. And of course, all of this is dwarfed by the intensity of signal you get a few centimeters away from a 1-W cell phone.

    So test cell phones. If they don't fry your brain, forget about wifi routers and towers, their effect is negligeable next to a cell phone's signal flux. And cell phones were innocented by several studies.

    Attention journalists: When you cover technology, either learn the basics of what you're talking about or go back to freelancing for people rags.

    --
    Fantasy: http://ferrisfantasy.blogspot.com/
  3. Re:I have a dream! by nekozid · · Score: 5, Funny

    A bed made from plutonium would be awesome infact.
    Nice warm bed to get into every night? Yes please!

  4. "Radiation" by Bazman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Notice how they refer to it as 'radiation', because radiation is clearly a *bad thing*. It killed all those people in Hiroshima didn't it? Nasty.

    Well, never mind that 1W of radiation coming out of your phone or Wifi router. There's maybe 100W coming out of your light bulbs (or less if you have Al Gore-compliant lightbulbs). And what's more, that radiation doesn't pass straight through you, a lot of it is intercepted by the body! I think we need a campaign to stop radiation in the 400nm to 700nm wavelength range from infecting our children! Ban it now! That, and Dihydrogen Monoxide...

    Bad Science has lots of info on this and other science quackery.

  5. Re:I can't wait! by BlueParrot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I like to group them all together into one cathegory I refer to as "morons". It doesn't matter if you are dealing with neo-cons, green peace, ID promoters... It is all the same and it goes:

    1)I think A
    2)People with better qualifications say A is a bad idea
    3)People with better qualifications have been wrong before
    4)Therefore they are wrong now.
    5)Thus A is a good idea.
    6)People who don't want A are opposed to good ideas, so they must be evil.
    7)It is all a conspiracy to tax/ruin our morals/benefit coorporations/steal your freedom/eat babies...

    Really, from Homeopaths to Inteligent Designers, it is always the same. "Qualified people are sometimes wrong, so you should listen to my wacky idea instead." It is usually commbined with some conspiracy theory or general criticism of the scientific method interspersed with emotional or irrelevant arguments "Al gore is wasteful and just want to STEAL your tax dollars, hence GW isn't real." etc...

  6. Re:I have a dream! by Hatta · · Score: 5, Informative

    You do know that ionizing radiation (e.g. alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays from nuclear decay) has absolutely nothing to do with non-ionizing (e.g. radio, microwave, etc) EM radiation. Confusing the two, even in jest, doesn't help the situation.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  7. Re:I have a dream! by audubon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Glory be to the Bomb, and to the Holy Fallout. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. World without end. Amen. May the Blessings of the Bomb Almighty, and the Fellowship of the Holy Fallout, descend upon us all. This day and forever more. Amen!