Massachusetts Boarding School Sued Over Wi-Fi Sickness

alphadogg writes: The parents of an anonymous student at the Fay School in Southborough, Mass., allege that the Wi-Fi at the institution is making their child sick, according to a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court earlier this month (PDF). The child, identified only as "G" in court documents, is said to suffer from electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome. The radio waves emitted by the school's Wi-Fi routers cause G serious discomfort and physical harm, according to the suit. "After being continually denied access to the school in order to test their student's classroom, and having their request that all classrooms in which their child is present have the WiFi network replaced with a hard-wired Ethernet denied, the parents sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act."

Comments

What does Science have to say about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, they should have some kind of proof that the Wi-Fi is the reason, right?

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[fredgiblet]

As far as I've heard so far there's been no proof to back it up.

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[Austerity Empowers]

Well, if I stand outside in the hot texas sun for over half an hour, I do develop a bad skin rash that burns, itches and stings for a day or so. Sometimes it's also accompanied by nausea and lethargy. I suppose I have EHS!

Of course doctors don't diagnose me properly, instead they ask me to apply this skin lotion before hand, and warn me if I keep going out without it I may get cancer. I have tried to sue the sun, and have asked it to turn itself down, but it never complies for more than 12 hours a time, frequently less.

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy way to win the Amazing Randi's million dollar challenge for supernatural powers. If you get sick when they turn the wi-fi on and feel better when they turn it off, you have the ability to detect 2.4GHz radiation with your body.

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[Firethorn]

There have been double-blind tests performed, but the subjects were quite upset when they learned that apparently it wasn't the wifi signals making them sick, but the blinking lights on the wireless devices.

IE lights disabled, radios fully enabled, on highest power, transmitting data: No symptoms.
Simulated status light activity, radios completely disabled and unpowered: symptoms.
Lights & radio on : symptoms
Lights & radio disabled: no symptoms.

Conclusion: Clearly we need to investigate the status lights. ;)

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[flopsquad]

Bring in a portable faraday cage and have him sit in it.

Sounds like reasonable accomodation to me, problem solved.

"Thus arose, in the early 20's, a small subculture of spherically encased children known as 'Faraday Hamsters.'

Enabled by a 2017 Supreme Court interpretation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, these 'Faraday Hamsters' could frequently be seen running their electromagnetically impervious cages down school hallways along special troughs--evocative of the famous boulder chase scene in the 20th century classic, Raiders of the Lost Ark."

--Collected Histories of the Twenty-First Century

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

LMGTFY: http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/facts/fs296/en/

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[Firethorn]

I disagree. There is no reason at all to show lights if what you are really testing is sensitivity to radio signals.

As the famous 'experiment' down in South Africa showed, where the cell phone tower operators shut the tower off six weeks before a meeting about turning the tower off, where people were STILL expressing the same symptoms, how getting away from the tower decreased them, how it was the radiation from the tower giving them rashes and such, perception is a thing.

By having the lights be visible, it allowed the study to not just test radio sensitivity, it allowed them to test perception of radio sensitivity.

The test essentially showed that the people were getting sick when they thought they were being bombarded with radio waves, not when they were actually being bombarded.

A real test would not provide any misleading clues.

They tested that as well. They had 4 different tests - Radio & lights, Radio & dark, No Radio &lights, No Radio & dark. Symptoms tracked with the status lights on the test device, not the radio waves.

If people were sensitive, but also fooling themselves with the lights, more people would have shown something when the lights were dark but the radio was on.

Re:What does Science have to say about this?

[Smidge204]

I disagree. There is no reason at all to show lights if what you are really testing is sensitivity to radio signals.

There's no parlor tricks here. The lights are the placebo in a placebo-controlled study.

If you want to determine if a medicine is really the cause of the effect on patient's health - positive or negative - then you use a placebo to rule out the possibility that swallowing a huge pill or getting an injection itself is causing some psychological effect. You have the real medicine (lights+signal), fake medicine (lights + no signal), control group (no lights + no signal), and sometimes an alternative treatment (no lights + signal).

There is a known (or at least claimed) correlation between WiFi signals and reported illness. The test is designed to isolate the effects of perceivable stimulus (lights on the device) with the supposed cause of the illness (the invisible WiFi signals). Intuitively we all "know" that WiFi signals do not cause any physiological effects. But something is apparently effecting these people, and the test is aimed at figuring out what that something is.
=Smidge=

ADA act? What's their disability

[barc0001]

Chronic stupidity? Overactive placebo gland?

Oh dear

[viperidaenz]

I hope they don't have any cell phones in their house.
I hope they don't use a microwave.
I hope they don't live near any cell towers.
I hope they don't live near any TV or radio transmitters

What would be funny is if they had turned off WiFi in his classes and not told them, and they continued to complain.

I suffer from Bullshit-Intolerance Syndrome

[xeno]

My condition causes me significant discomfort around people who say aggressively stupid things, internalize and repeat strange diagnoses they read on the internet, and causes me to have thoughts of self-harm when listening to security software vendor presentations. I have repeatedly asked my employer to accommodate my needs stemming from Bullshit-intolerance Syndrome (BS), but they all just say, "that's bullshit, we won't tolerate that" to which I say "yes, that's my problem too." Perhaps I also suffer from Jackass Impulsive Recursive Comment (JIRC) disorder, but they don't want to hear about that either. I'm gonna sue.

Re:ADA act? What's their disability

[aaron4801]

Cyberchondria

Too be fair

[nedlohs]

The parents are apparently mentally disabled.

Re:yes

[timrod]

Of course Wifi only exists near hotspots, which is why I plan to sell the parents behind this lawsuit my own unique brand of Wifi that won't trigger their son's sensitivity. As everyone knows, only Wifi routers put out harmful radiation that can trigger such totally real disorders as electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome. Microwaves, on the other hand, contain all their radiation entirely within the steel box using the powers of science.

By putting their Wifi router in the microwave, along with any devices they wish to receive wifi, and turning the microwave on for 12 hours, young G's parents can bake the Wifi right into their devices without any risk of electromagnetic radiation triggering their son's disorder. I like to call it Mi-Fi.

Re:yes

[Adriax]

Shouldn't it be called Wi-Fri?

Upgrade the child

[Nkwe]

The child, identified only as "G" in court documents

Well there is the problem. If the child identified himself as "N", there wouldn't be a conflict and the kid would learn faster.

Re:Doctor's diagnosis

[DarkSkiez]

From that physicians website

She treats cancer with homeopathy. "Supportive Care for Cancer: Possible treatments include: Complex homeopathy"

This makes me sad.

Chronically Stupid Parents

[redshirt]

I occasionally read about parents in affluent Marin, CA whining about this. In fact, there was a movement to prevent PG&E (the local power company) from installing real-time meters that transmit usage over radio because they were afraid it could hurt them. I remember seeing a parent interviewed on the evening news, with her kid in the background playing on an iPad. Did I mention that Marin also has one of the lowest child immunization rates in the country? Yeah. These are people that get all their "facts" from Pintrest and Jenny McCarthy.

Re:commentsubjectsaredumb

[Nutria]

Even "better":
http://drhubbuch.com/

Her interest in health and assisting her patients take control of their own health began with her work in the Womenâ(TM)s Self Help Health Movement.

Even more better than better...

Dr. Hubbuch is a member of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine

But the AAEM is not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties, and is mentioned in Quackwatch.
http://www.abms.org/member-boa...
http://www.quackwatch.org/04Co...

Re:ADA act? What's their disability

[alannon]

I propose a novel treatment:
Seal pure water into a container and place it into a microwave oven for 1 millisecond (or a microsecond for extreme cases). Sell it as a homopathic treatment for $50/ounce.

Re:No medical evidence...

[Darinbob]

I work in a building full of equipment broadcasting on several different bands all day long, not just the few piddly wi-fi routers. It seems that every day I come to work I spend the day completely depressed, but I cheer up again when I go home at night. My only conclusion is that RF causes depression.

Re:Blind test.

[Technician]

Some cell tower companies and ham radio operators moving into elite neighbourhoods with high lawyer representation often will pre build the expansion and not install the equipment to collect baseline data and use the new complaints and lawsuits as baseline of the pre existing conditions. It's hard to make a case against the new cell tower or ham radio operator when the court case reveals to the plaintiffs the only operating device is the obstruction beacon.

Later when the equipment arrives and is installed, the community is not informed. Only then can the real cases be identified. Most of the time, the numbers are in the 0's.

If you put up a tower in a nice neighbourhood, make it look nice. Leave it unpowered for a few months. Reduce power on nearby towers to make marginal areas worse. Offer better signal by upgrades to nearby towers. Switch on the new tower to cover the poor coverage areas. Result, more even signal coverage with fewer towers running high power to reach into dead zones.