Wi-Fi Illness Claim Doesn't Impress New Mexico Court

yay by MickyTheIdiot · 2012-09-20 02:26 · Score: 4, Funny

Basic sanity wins once in a while. Maybe one of every 50 cases.

Re:yay by NatasRevol · 2012-09-20 02:49 · Score: 4, Informative

That statement, as is, is obviously not true. However, I believe that's an editor's words, not the judges words.
From FTA, the judge said:
"reliable studies, including one from the World Health Organization, “have failed to provide clear support for a causal relationship between electromagnetic fields and complaints of EMS"."

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:yay by LordLimecat · 2012-09-20 02:53 · Score: 4, Insightful

We are constantly bombarded with radiation across the EM spectrum, from visible light to infra red (which we, ourselves, emit) to ultraviolet to radio. I think its fair for the judge to say "show me proof that we're all slowly getting cancer from radio waves".
Re:yay by mcgrew · 2012-09-20 03:15 · Score: 5, Informative

Why would hospitals worry about the dose of X-rays they give you if "no scientific study has yet proved that electromagnetic stimulus adversely impacts personal health"?
Because the danger from X-rays isn't that they're electromagnetic, it's because the radiation is ionizing. Normal radio waves aren't.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 03:25 · Score: 2

The wavelength is much smaller for x-rays and gamma rays, allowing it to penetrate deeply (sounds like fun!) and disrupt atoms. In comparison, RF and microwave EMF is easily blocked. That metal grill on the front of your microwave oven does just that.
The only danger with RF and/or microwave EMF is being in close proximity to a high-powered source. RF/microwave is safely blocked by skin, but the energy has to go somewhere, so it becomes heat. This is how a microwave oven works. But wi-fi and cell phones are so low power that it's ridiculous to worry.
If you still think EMF is worth worrying about, then you should also avoid visible light. After all, visible light lasers can be used to cut flesh.
Re:yay by RobertLTux · 2012-09-20 03:33 · Score: 2

in the same fashion that folks do not worry about somebody throwing a pencil tip at you and somebody SHOOTING you
its all about the doseage

--
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Re:yay by ColdWetDog · 2012-09-20 04:28 · Score: 5, Funny

This is the dumbest comment I've read all week
You must be new here.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 04:59 · Score: 2, Informative

It's more like saying, "Just because some chemicals are dangerous doesn't mean all chemicals are dangerous." Water is a chemical, after all. I guarantee that ingesting 1 liter of water will have a much different effect than ingesting a 10M solution of NaOH, despite the fact that they're both chemicals.
Re:yay by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-09-20 05:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

That is like saying poisons are not poisonous because they are chemicals, but because they chemically interact.
Which is completely true and a great point to make.

--
Ezekiel 23:20
Re:yay by Shoten · 2012-09-20 05:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

Which is actually correct. What makes a poison poisonous isn't the inherent nature of being a chemical; it is the interaction that it has with an organism's chemistry. That's why chocolate is safe for humans, and poison to dogs. It's the same component (theobromine) in chocolate that stimulates humans and poisons dogs; the nature of that chemical interaction is what is different, and thus makes all the different.
In this case, however, there's a difference in types of electromagnetic stimulus. X-rays are nothing like radio signals emanated from consumer electronics. Not at all similar. So, what mcgrew was really saying was more like "that's a whole other kind of chemical than the one that the OP is talking about. Just because warfarin is lethal at relatively small doses doesn't mean that table salt is, even though they are both technically chemicals."

--

For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
Re:yay by Genda · 2012-09-20 06:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

I see that physics isn't your strong suit. Here are the electromagnetic wave types that our science is familiar with;
Radio waves
Microwaves
Far - Near Infrared waves
Visible light
Ultraviolet - Hard Ultraviolet
X-rays
Gamma rays
Any light from mid visible through gamma rays can cause fluorescence, that is excite and electron to a higher state than well it drops have it emit a photon at a different wavelength. Ionization usually requires higher energies and demands light with wavelength from Ulraviolet to Gamma rays. The only difference between these forms of light are their wave length/frequency/source temperature. For instance we can now see the echo of the big bang as a microwave afterglow across the entire sky, and the static you see between channels on your TV or hear on your radio is part of the same phenomenon.
There are a number of EM waves that can harm or kill you. Microwaves tuned to the frequency of water can cook you, they are also known to cause cataracts and sterility. UV can damage your skin and cause sun burn and melanoma. X-rays can cause lethal radiation sickness and cancer as can gamma rays. Just being in the fields of such things as radio and microwaves below a certain threshold have not been proven to cause illness, though there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of possible cancer caused by radar emissions, and energy fields around high tension power lines. Sadly, anecdotal evidence is not proof, and we've built entire industries on these forms of radiation (every time you make a cell phone call you microwave your brain) so without hard evidence its very hard to justify costly industrial standards that might hurt cultural progress and innovation. That said, its seems very possible that there are human being with a prediliction to EM sensitivity, just as there are rare folks who can hear well about the normal 20 Khz. cut-off for most healthy, young people. Rather than demonizing them we need to study them and see if in fact that are canaries in the mine and may point to threat against the general public. As well, we have folks whose sensitivity lies more in the realm of hypochondria and irrational fear, for those folks we can show compassion (their suffering is real even if the cause isn't), but we need to enlighten them, that their fear is not based in any physical phenomenon and is more properly placed in the realm of the psychological.
Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 07:27 · Score: 2, Informative

Sadly, anecdotal evidence is not proof, and we've built entire industries on these forms of radiation (every time you make a cell phone call you microwave your brain) so without hard evidence its very hard to justify costly industrial standards that might hurt cultural progress and innovation. That said, its seems very possible that there are human being with a prediliction to EM sensitivity, just as there are rare folks who can hear well about the normal 20 Khz. cut-off for most healthy, young people. Rather than demonizing them we need to study them and see if in fact that are canaries in the mine and may point to threat against the general public.
We have, in many, many peer-reviewed papers, and the general consensus is "no." However, I await your peer-reviewed paper showing otherwise.
Re:yay by serviscope_minor · 2012-09-20 07:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

just because A==B does not mean B==A
Well, that's some interesting axioms you must be working with. I guess you could devise a system where == does not commute. I like equality to be commutative and transaitive (*cough* PHP *cough*).
all dogs may be mammals but not all mammals are dogs
You mean subset of not equal to. The dog species is not equal to a mammal, it is a subset of mammals.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:yay by sl149q · 2012-09-20 17:51 · Score: 2

Classic example of a nocebo effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocebo
"a nocebo reaction or response refers to harmful, unpleasant, or undesirable effects a subject manifests after receiving an inert dummy drug or placebo. Nocebo responses are not chemically generated and are due only to the subject's pessimistic belief and expectation that the inert drug will produce negative consequences.
In these cases, there is no "real" drug involved, but the actual negative consequences of the administration of the inert drug, which may be physiological, behavioural, emotional, and/or cognitive, are nonetheless real."
So the effects may actually be real but are not actually caused by anything other than the belief that something is causing it.
Is society responsible for idiots that have convinced themselves that they should be sick so that they end up being sick?

3 cheers for Judge Singleton by gestalt_n_pepper · 2012-09-20 02:28 · Score: 4, Funny

Sanity. We haz it.

--
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.

Simple question... by Joce640k · 2012-09-20 02:31 · Score: 3, Interesting

Have they found an 'electrosensitive' who's prepared to go double-blind on which of a selection of ten telephones/routers is actually switched on yet?

A certain Mr Randi has a million dollars waiting for the first person to do it. Maybe he should apply for that so he can buy a new house in the woods (or even buy the neighbors house and make them go someplace else). Problem solved.

--
No sig today...

Re:Simple question... by firex726 · 2012-09-20 02:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

Or take the Darwin approach; selection of ten wires, nine are hot and you're grounded.
If you're electrosensitive it should be no issue to figure out which one's cold and not electrocute yourself.
Re:Simple question... by MetalliQaZ · 2012-09-20 03:08 · Score: 2

I assume you are using AC on those lines, otherwise there would be no waves to "detect". Lines with enough power to cause a fatality can be detected by normal human beings. You could use the rug to build up some static electricity on your person, then place your arm hairs near the wires. You'd have to be very careful, but I think you could do it.

--
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
Re:Simple question... by Joce640k · 2012-09-20 03:30 · Score: 2

The JREF expanded the scope of its challenge over the last few years. They now include things like telling the difference between Monster speaker cables and cheapo lamp wire.

--
No sig today...
Re:Simple question... by firex726 · 2012-09-20 07:08 · Score: 2

Not normals, just people who claim they can detect electromagnetism...
If their claims are true they should have no problem.
Re:Simple question... by Joce640k · 2012-09-20 08:26 · Score: 2

Right, plenty of animals out there are electrosensitive, sharks and many predators that hunt in mud or murky water have receptors that respond to the tiny electric signals
That's electric current, transmitted through a conductive medium. No scientist will have a problem with that.
"Electrosensitive" in the context of this thread is a label people apply to themselves when they think electronic devices make them ill. It's not electric current in water, it's (relatively) low frequency electromagnetic waves traveling through air. Back in the 70's it was overhead power lines, these days it's WiFi, mobile phones, etc.

As for the ESP prize, as others have pointed out if anyone actually has such powers they probably wouldn't advertise it. Kids learn early that being different is dangerous to your well being, and adults who don't choose to blind themselves to such things realize that there really are plenty of shadowy organizations in the world, government and otherwise, that would be interested in controlling or destroying such a person. Opportunistic or self-deluded individuals on the other hand don't have to worry about such things.
If there was a percentage of the human race with ESP powers there'd be no such thing as a casino.

--
No sig today...

Re:How much you wanna bet... by firex726 · 2012-09-20 02:33 · Score: 4, Interesting

If he actually did feel any symptoms they would probably just psychosomatic.

TBH I would not be surprised if there was some feud between them and he just went full retard. Someone who sues because of WiFi probably is not entirely there to begin with.

Wasn't there also some public school district that was suffering legal trouble from the same claims?

Never amazed by roland_mai · 2012-09-20 02:35 · Score: 5, Funny

Gentlemen we found Magneto's cousin, ElectroMangeto. His powers are retarded though.

Does this mean . . . by smooth+wombat · 2012-09-20 02:36 · Score: 2

he doesn't watch television, use a computer, have any electrical device in his house, doesn't use lights of any kind, and has shielded his house from any and all radio sources?

Did he also request that we snuff out the Sun and stars, not to mention getting rid of the naturally occurring radioactivity in the soil around him?

What about cars/trucks that drive by his house or the street lights? Did he request to have them stopped?

I am offering my services to prove once and for all that these people cannot tell when a wi-fi or similar device is on or off. I will offer my entire life's savings to anyone who can tell, greater than random chance, whether a device is on or off.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower

Re:Does this mean . . . by slim · 2012-09-20 02:41 · Score: 5, Interesting

I will offer my entire life's savings to anyone who can tell, greater than random chance, whether a device is on or off.
Randi's already offered $1M.
But these people are wackos. They don't understand why a 50% detection rate demonstrates nothing.

Re:Way of the world by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 02:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

Dude. Don't jump, okay?

Re:Way of the world by thePowerOfGrayskull · 2012-09-20 02:52 · Score: 4, Funny

Not when there's a sea of assholes just waiting to step on their back

Now there's a fine visual for you.

Re:Eat popcorn! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-09-20 03:00 · Score: 5, Informative

Well, he can always start eating lots of microwave popcorn and try it that way. $7.2 million isn't bad, is it?

"Popcorn lung" makes it sound funny; but that one is actually a pretty ugly story(at least for the production workers and some of the QA guys at the plants, this guy must have really been a big fan to inhale that much). Let's just say that "constrictive bronchiolitis obliterans" is almost as much fun as it sounds like it would be. A much rarer disease; but the macro-scale symptoms are pretty similar to emphysema.

The matter first came to broader attention when NIOSH looked into a cluster of occurrences of this(usually quite uncommon) condition at a microwave popcorn plant. As it turns out, diacetyl, the usual artificial butter flavoring component, causes a delightful progressive, irreversible, destruction of lung capacity(pretty much what 'bronchiolitis obliterans' sounds like it does, it does.) The most severe cases require permanent supplemental oxygen or lung transplants to survive. Less severe cases experience ongoing shortness of breath and respiratory difficulties(whether only under exertion, or even when idle depends on the severity of the case).

As usual with these cases, the story of the discovery is littered with OSHA dragging its feet, popcorn producers skipping cheap protective measures like extractor fans to keep exposure down(25k to install fans, or slow death for the workers in the mixing room... Hmm, which is better for shareholder value?), and similar depressing anecdotes. Since consumer exposure is much, much lower than flavor-mixing exposure, the FDA has twiddled its thumbs about any questions of reconsidering the present regulatory status of 'safe' give to diacetyl as a food ingredient; but some are a bit concerned...

Re:How much you wanna bet... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 03:01 · Score: 2

yes, exactly. I remember an article from about a year ago (too lazy to go find it, but it was covered here on slashdot) where a company put up a new cell tower and immediately began getting these "it made me sick" complaints. However the tower had not been powered up yet. So, it is a simple case of (choose one or more) psychosomatic issue, or fakers wanting money, or people are actually allergic to metals or paints in towers and not the RF.

Re:How much you wanna bet... by Talderas · 2012-09-20 03:05 · Score: 4, Funny

TBH I would not be surprised if there was some feud between them and he just went full retard.

You never go full retard.

--
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork

Been there, done that by RogueyWon · 2012-09-20 03:11 · Score: 5, Interesting

Went through something similar (though it didn't go to court) in my old flat, which I moved out of earlier this year. Middle-aged couple living downstairs, got on fine with them for years, then the woman's late-teenaged daughter from a previous marriage gets kicked out by her father and moves in with them in the summer of last year (putting 3 people in a flat which is, to be honest, a little small for one person and downright cramped for 2).

This is one deeply troubled youth - clear mental health problems and surrounded by a constant stench of strong cannabis. She can also - in her mothers' eyes, do no wrong. Anyway, my life very quickly becomes absolute hell. First it's the complaints about noise. I take these seriously at first and do everything I can to limit the noise I'm making. Doesn't help, indeed she calls the police on multiple occasions, though they don't actually do anything. She loses access that particular trick after she calls the police over a weekend when I'm away visiting my parents - they force open the door to my flat and find it empty. After that, they stopped responding to her calls.

Anyway, in the course of this, she gets to see inside my flat (while I'm not there, imagine how delighted I am) - and she notes the fairly large amount of electronic equipment. Her next move - a phone call to the council complaining that interference from the electronics in my flat is giving her headaches.

I get a very puzzled call from an environmental health officer. He's very apologetic about the whole thing and freely admits that he has no idea whether he has any legal basis to do anything. By this point, I've already got my escape in sight - I've finally, after 4 years, been able to save for the deposit needed to get a mortage and out of rental accomodation (and to move to a much better area in the process). So I'm quite prepared to be all reasonable and light. We agree that he can come and inspect my flat for anything that might be emitting either outside of the allowed spectrum, or high-pitched noises outside the normal hearing range (which can be a genuine issue for teenagers and for some adults - like me!).

Anyway, he comes, he waves a toolkit around and he agrees that there's absolutely nothing out of the ordinary. He sends my neighbours a letter telling them this. He and I then get a very angry letter back (or rather, he gets a letter, I get a copy pushed through my letterbox with something obscene scribbed on it as well) saying that, among other things, my wireless network is "beaming words through her head".

Two days later, I load my possessions into a van and move off to my new home. I've not seen or heard from her since. I still see my old upstairs neighbour, who works at a station I pass through on my morning commute (and who I always got on very well with). He tells me that she continues to make life unbearable for the new occupants of my old flat and has started to turn her attention to him as well.

It would have been interesting on one level to see what would have happened if I hadn't been in a position to move out - but I'm glad I didn't have to find out.

By the way, this all happened in London, so it's definitely not a US-only phenomenon.

Re:Been there, done that by DBCubix · 2012-09-20 03:26 · Score: 2

I would have called Mental Health and had her involuntarily committed. At that point you have enough of a paper trail to get her some help.

--
I called it a mighty Sperm Whale, she called it Finding Nemo.
Re:Been there, done that by slim · 2012-09-20 03:29 · Score: 3, Informative

or high-pitched noises outside the normal hearing range (which can be a genuine issue for teenagers and for some adults - like me!).
This is significant. Despite fast approaching my 40th year, I can still hear those inhumane "mosquito" devices designed to keep teenagers from loitering.
My dad has a PSU in his study which makes a constant, loud, high pitched tone. It drives me mad. Nobody else in the family can hear it (but then, my dad's high frequency hearing is so wrecked he can't hear hi-hats).
I find it easy to believe that someone superstitious could think that tone was electromagnetism.
Re:Been there, done that by RogueyWon · 2012-09-20 03:48 · Score: 2, Interesting

Yes, quite, I can also hear those mosquito devices, despite being well up into my 30s. When I was in my teens, my dad was a director in a small business that sold, serviced and provided training for medical electronics. It was a very small company and even the directors did a bit of hands-on engineering, so our garage was often full of bits of medical kit.
There was one weekend that I spent seriously ill - headaches, nausea, dizziness. Eventually, I tracked it down to a monitor in the garage. My dad didn't want to believe me, but it was proven int he end.
So when this came to a head earlier this year, I was actually perfectly happy to have my flat checked to see whether there was something even further up the range beyond what I could hear - but we proved that there wasn't.
And yes, I would not be the slightest bit surprised if this were behind at least some of the complaints of "magical computer waves give me headaches".
Re:Been there, done that by HornWumpus · 2012-09-20 06:04 · Score: 2

Just go to a few Slayer shows. Sit right in front of the speakers. Your high pitch sensitivity will be cleared right up.

--
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'

question guy's attorney by RichMan · 2012-09-20 03:11 · Score: 5, Funny

Q: Do you have a cell phone?
Att: Yes
Q: Is it normally on?
Att: Yes
Q: Do you drive and talk with a wireless head set?
Att: Yes
Q: Do you use a computer in your office?
Att: Yes
Q: Is it a laptop?
Att: Yes
Q: Do you connect to cable to access email, or do you use wireless?
Att: wireless

Q: Can you explain how your client ever got within 100feet of you or your office?

Re:Way of the world by Immerman · 2012-09-20 03:27 · Score: 5, Funny

A corporation is like a tree full of monkeys - when those at the top look down they see a tree full of smiling faces, but when those at the bottom look up all they see is a bunch of assholes.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.

Re:Not his neighbor's problem. by Anubis+IV · 2012-09-20 03:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you are bothering or disturbing your neighbors, it is understood that you will undertake reasonable efforts to rectify the situation. For instance, if you were playing your music extremely loudly, the proper response would not be to have your neighbor spend thousands of dollars installing soundproofing throughout their house in order to "deal with it themselves". The proper response would be to ask you to turn it down, and, if you refused, to call the police and have them issue you a citation for violating local noise ordinances. Similarly, if your water hose was left running for an extended period of time and had begun to flood your neighbor's garden, the proper response is not for your neighbor to go out and buy sandbags to obstruct the flow of water. Instead, they should just ask you to turn off the hose.

Essentially, your rights end as soon as they step on mine, so if you're causing harm to me or my property, or else causing a disturbance, I am well within my rights to ask that you cease doing so. And should you fail to respond, local ordinances will likely back me up.

The difference in this case is that we're talking about something that causes no demonstrable harm or disturbance.

Re:How much you wanna bet... by firex726 · 2012-09-20 03:51 · Score: 2

Well how's he going to know that if he has no wifi?
lol

Re:How much you wanna bet... by jythie · 2012-09-20 04:04 · Score: 2

Actually, there is a pretty sizable alt-med community that believe EM from modern electronics make us sick because the energy in their body is going a different direction or something. In the US they pay for (what they think) are shielded walls and stuff.

Re:How much you wanna bet... by firex726 · 2012-09-20 04:12 · Score: 4, Interesting

There is also a sizable population of mental patients who think they are Joan or Ark or Napoleon.
Good thing physics does not care how many people believe in something.

How do they account for background radiation, or all the other various EM radiation we're exposed to every day?
Do they live in some kind of 100% perfect Faraday cage that blocks all forms of radiation; because I know some physicists that would love to get their hands on a building material that could do that.

Oh he wouldn't like me by kilodelta · 2012-09-20 04:26 · Score: 2

Why, I hold both amateur radio extra and commercial radiotelphone licenses.

I'd kindly explain Part 15 to him. You know, the one that says devices have to accept interference from licensed services and may not generate interference to licensed services.

And then I'd pop a 100 foot tower on the property under PRB-1 and then proceed to transmit on 20m at 200W for starters. Maybe install a dish and do some EME or meteor scatter.

Re:Oh he wouldn't like me by confused+one · 2012-09-20 07:10 · Score: 4, Informative

Almost there but not quite. First step is to put up the dish, tower and antennas, then wait a couple weeks. Put up a yagi as well, pointed in the general direction of the neighbor, just for fun. When the complaints start rolling in, invite the authorities over and show them that nothing is connected to the antennas
old trick. works to discredit neighbors who complain needlessly.

Re:Headaches from cellular telephones: are they re by EmagGeek · 2012-09-20 04:26 · Score: 4, Funny

I can see how government bureaucrats can incorrectly attribute headaches to cell phones.

The headaches are caused not by the cell phone, but the person on the other side.

Re:How much you wanna bet... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 04:31 · Score: 2

In the city where I live, a city-wide wireless network was set to be opened in the autumn a few years ago. After the opening "ceremony", a bunch of people started complaining about various diffuse pains and tiredness. What they didn't know, was that the wireless network had been on for more than half a year for testing the infrastructure. There was no doubt in these peoples minds that the problem was caused by the wireless network, and they demanded it switched off.
Morons.

just because fring's dead, don't mean it's safe by Eponymous+Hero · 2012-09-20 04:31 · Score: 3, Funny

this guy's not crazy, or sick. check for the blue meth.

--
insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT

Wifi-type radiation CAN cause harm... by Maxmin · 2012-09-20 04:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

Grant that, a dosage of wifi-wavelength radio emissions of sufficiently high wattage and duration, aimed at his cranium, *would* cause this man some mental health issues.

But people like this neglect to consider a little something I like to call the "inverse square law." Not to mention multiple layers of sheetrock and other possible cladding on the domicile.

Recently in San Francisco I saw a sign on a house with the text "Electromagnetic Harassment" in a red circle-slash, with lightning bolt symbols around the head of a stick figure man that was falling backwards. Wish I'd taken a picture.

--
O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.

Crazy Santa Fe by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 04:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

I live in Santa Fe and I work for a WISP so I deal with wireless interference all the time. Santa Fe is blanketed by WiFi as well as WiMAX, that's not counting the 50000 watt radio transmitter overlooking the city, nor is it taking into account the wireless signals used by the city, county, state, and Federal government. And don't get me started about Los Alamos National Labs not far from here which is constantly blasting out radio waves of every imaginable frequency and strength. Yet, we here in Santa Fe have a small but very vocal group of crackpots who insist upon putting the kibosh any any sort of wireless initiative, be it cellular, WiFi, WiMAX, etc, etc, some on the City Council listen to them, but anybody with a brain calls them what they are, crazy. This court ruling hopefully will show how shallow their claims truly are. Without a shred of solid evidence, nobody will, nor should they, take them seriously.

Re:Looking for helpful references by ColdWetDog · 2012-09-20 04:51 · Score: 2

Just last week my father sent me an article from a motorcycle magazine that proposed that EM energy (including wifi, cell phones, et cetera) is harmful to the human body. My father is a logical person who can listen to reason...he just isn't well informed on this issue. Does anyone have any suggestions on scholarly reference material I can link to when I rebut this article? So far I haven't found anything well written that wasn't behind a paywall.

A motorcycle magazine? They're worried about cell phones and they tolerate the 60kv from the coil that's busily building charge (and a field) up right between their legs?

My head aslpode. Again.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!

Re:How much you wanna bet... by The+Archon+V2.0 · 2012-09-20 05:12 · Score: 5, Informative

TBH I would not be surprised if there was some feud between them and he just went full retard.

Nah, he was full retard from day one. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/28/nation/la-na-hometown-santa-fe28-2010mar28

My favorite parts: "waves of nausea, vertigo, body aches, dizziness, heart arrhythmia and insomnia returned -- all, he says, because she was using an iPhone, a laptop computer, a wireless router and dimmer switches." To stress this: he gets that sick from DIMMER SWITCHES 30 FEET AWAY. And it would have to be a damn fantastic dimmer to have wi-fi.

And: "Firstenberg said he was staying with friends and occasionally sleeping in his car." A dimmer switch in a house about 30 feet from his makes him sick, but he can drive (I assume) and sleep in a car about a yard from an internal combustion engine, alternator, and a lead acid battery.

Wasn't there also some public school district that was suffering legal trouble from the same claims?

You were probably thinking of: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/07/wi-fi_lawsuit_against_portland.html

Or maybe: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2003/10/60769

But there's been a LOT of places suffering legal trouble: http://www.smdp.com/resident-files-1-7b-claim-with-city-hall/

If you want to find more, look up Magda Havas. She's making a nice profit being an "expert" on how Wifi is killing you and UR BABIEZZZZZ. Then there's Barrie Trower. I haven't heard much about him except that he adds some conspiracy theory to the mix and meets interesting people like the king of Botswana (the country is a republic).

Re:How much you wanna bet... by meerling · 2012-09-20 05:41 · Score: 2

Don't forget the ones that believe in Hollow Earth, Homeopathy, Magic, Demonic Possession, Alien Invasions, Flat Earth, Werewolves, Vampires, and so many other things. There's way too many people around these days that think reason is anathema and science is based on belief.

Re:Not his neighbor's problem. by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2012-09-20 05:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

I don't have to bend over backwards to satisfy my neighbor's needs.

Where do you live? Because I want to move there.
Where I live (Vancouver Canada) we regularly get people complaining about the noise and inconvenience caused by the PNE (Pacific National Exhibition), not what these people completely ignore if the fact that the PNE has been going on for 100 years! So they knew the score when they moved to the area. The worst part, from my perspective, is that people listen to these whack jobs. The response should be "The PNE was here first. Here is a $250 fine for wasting my time."

I feel the same way about these "WiFi makes me sick" idiots.

--
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?

It's the shape of the wave that is the problem by arthurpaliden · 2012-09-20 05:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

Cell phone radio waves are used for carrying voice. This means that they are analog in nature and are therefore sine waves. Now sine waves are by their very nature are curved. This means they are easily able to flow over and around DNA and other molecular structures such as proteins. This is not the case for digital computer WiFi EM radiation. The data computer WiFi radiation carries is digital in nature and therefore only has two values 1 and 0. This means that it is transmitted as a square wave with a flat instead of a curved leading edge. As a result it is not able to easily flow over and around a cell's DNA but rather slams into it at several hundred thousand times a second. This is like a hammer hitting a string of pearls over and over and over. Eventually the pearls and the string will break.

--
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo

DNA destruction by terrhertz by goombah99 · 2012-09-20 06:20 · Score: 5, Interesting

It has been demonstrated in the lab that exposure to terrhertz radiotion causes non-thermal changes in cellular development and signalling. a theoretical mechanism modeled and shows that low level terrahertz is capable of resonantly exciting bends and strand openings in Double stradded DNA. Since those are in fact the primary mechanisms of signal transduction at the molecular level it would not be surprising if this was the explanation for the experimental observations. However these studies are still at the preliminary stages. they are peer reviewed but there has not been a lot of other investigators yet to isolate and confirm the phenomena. Just a growing body of not fully chartcterized and explained observational phenonema of strong changes in cell regulation under low dose terrahertz. It has been noted to be frequency dependent which both is in line with the reonant effects argument and also could be why it is hard to study at this stage in a reproducible manner in different labs.

The reason this model is interesting is that, just as X-rays were thought safe until the mechanism of amplified effects from DNA damage became accepted, the problem is that terrhertz are individually too low in energy to break chemical bonds. Thus if there is means of affecting cells it has to be resonant, high field gradient effects, or something that works at a vibrational or rotational level in cells. All of these might have very different depths of penetration in multi-celluar organisms and their affects might be very indirect.

so it's not implausible, but is very murky.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.

Re:DNA destruction by terrhertz by green1 · 2012-09-20 17:19 · Score: 2

wifi doesn't work in the terrahertz range...

Re:How much you wanna bet... by cffrost · 2012-09-20 06:50 · Score: 2

Dimmer switches?

How would they produce any EM that is different from a regular toggle switch?

Inductors and autotransformers were among the components used in early dimmer designs. Current designs are solid-state, employing SCRs (silicon controlled rectifiers).

--
Thank you, Edward Snowden.

"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan

Re:How much you wanna bet... by firex726 · 2012-09-20 07:00 · Score: 2

Oh god I hate that word "natural"
Immediate red flag when it gets used to describe something.

"Made with ALL NATURAL ingredients"

So as opposed to synthetic ingredients? Arsenic is natural, hell it can even be a 100% pure element with no other compounds or elements mixed in; doesn't mean I'll want any on my food.

Interstellar space has "natural" radiation in it, why don't all these "natural" people go take a stroll and let us know how beneficial it is for their health, in the mean time I'll stay here under the magnetosphere.

Re:How much you wanna bet... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 07:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

interesting point as he self admits dizziness and vertigo (although for an unconfirmed reason) I would look to get his driving licence removed as a matter of public safety

can you also counter sue for legal costs and related expenditure?

I have the opposite problem by Darinbob · 2012-09-20 08:21 · Score: 2

My problem is that I need wifi to stay healthy. My neighbors refuse to use wifi. This cuts into my free internet usage and makes me depressed. I get constant headaches the longer my neighbors refuse to use wifi. I tried visiting a hospital but they use that inferior WPA brand of wifi which does not alleviate my headaches or sleeplessness. Should I sue my neighbors?

reminds me of a similar, way funnier case by slashmydots · 2012-09-20 08:40 · Score: 2

Anyone else recall that one group of people who all said they were suffering from symptoms due to wifi? As soon as the complaint was filed, it was switched off and a month later, they were demanding that it be turned off because their symptoms were worsening and the company that owned it revealed it had been switched off a month prior. They lost the case. Dumbasses.

Re:How much you wanna bet... by cdrguru · 2012-09-20 09:01 · Score: 2

The caution here is that once a belief gets to be sufficiently mainstream it is going to be impossible to defeat in court.

Today, people with EMF concerns are indeed able to block electric transmission lines - building a new transmission line is almost impossible to do because of the public complaints. Physics has nothing whatsoever to do with it, belief does.

Why you should be concerned is that homeopathy is one step away from being mandated to be covered by the new federally approved insurance plans. This will mean that every insurance plan in the US must cover homoepathic treatments. This is going to be a huge boon for the believers and give them all sorts of new credibility.

We are walking - er, running - down the road to such things right now.

And a ham moved in by WaffleMonster · 2012-09-20 09:48 · Score: 2

I can almost see the radio gear and home made antennas being carefully carried out of the u-haul van as Sir Firstenberg's new neighbors move in and make themselves at home.

A man can dream...

Re:How much you wanna bet... by green1 · 2012-09-20 17:27 · Score: 2

I'm a ham radio operator, I've been looking in to putting up a tower in my yard, the biggest suggestion I have received from all other hams is to put up the tower and the antennas several months before putting up any coax to connect anything. This allows you to deal with all the RF complaints quickly and easily so that by the time you actually connect anything the nutters have already been shut up.

Slashdot Mirror

Wi-Fi Illness Claim Doesn't Impress New Mexico Court

63 of 217 comments (clear)