2.4 GHz frequencies (WIFI / WLAN)

[Kasper]

[EDITThis is a split off[/EDIT]

About (children's) health, where I would be a little bit worried about are the 2.4 GHz frequencies that are increasing and increasing in the environment.
I don't know if you have ever heard about it.
But, those frequencies seems to affect child much more than adults.

WIFI, DECT phones, mobile phones, mobile internet, all those stuff... are at the 2.4 GHz level.
Of course, she will always get in contact width those frequencies, as everyone seems to have a smartphone at the moment.
But minimizing exposure at home in her first couple of years, would be a good thing I guess.

Do you WIFI, DECT phones, mobile phones, Ipads, etc?

[RRM]

We dont have WIFI, DECT or Ipads. Just regular mobiles.

those frequencies seems to affect child much more than adults.

Where did you get that from?

[Kasper]

We dont have WIFI, DECT or Ipads. Just regular mobiles.

Okay, that's great.

Where did you get that from?

'

Mostly Magda Havas. Here is an video where she tell about some studies:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v75sKAUFdc

[RRM]

Per Wiki:

A small percentage of Wi-Fi users have reported adverse health issues after repeat exposure and use of Wi-Fi,[58] though there has been no publication of any effects being observable in double-blind studies. A review of studies involving 725 people that claimed electromagnetic hypersensitivity found no evidence for their claims.(G. James Rubin) The ubiquity of Wi-Fi has led to calls for more research into the effects of "electronic smog".[60]

One study speculated that "laptops (Wi-Fi mode) on the lap near the testicles may result in decreased male fertility".[61] Another study found decreased working memory among males during Wi-Fi exposure.(Papageorgiou CC et al)

The World Health Organization (WHO) says "there is no risk from low level, long-term exposure to wi-fi networks" and the United Kingdom's Health Protection Agency reports that exposure to Wi-Fi for a year results in "same amount of radiation from a 20-minute mobile phone call." [63][64]

In November 2010 research results were published by Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands, which indicates that electromagnetic radiation may play a role in a deterioration in the health of trees. In a laboratory setting it appeared that portions of leaves of Ash saplings, after having been exposed for over three months to a radiation source similar to a wifi-access point, withered and died. The authors of the report noted however that further long-term tests were necessary. [65]

[Kasper]

from Magda Havas
http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp- ... notes1.pdf

The INTERPHONE study showed that adults who used a cell phone for more than 1,640 hours over a 10-year period had a 40% increased risk of developing a brain tumour, called a Glioma.
...
The U.S. Air Force completed a study in 1984 at a cost of $4.5 million dollars.
They exposed rats to pulsed 2450 MHz frequencies, which is Wi-Fi, at levels well below federal guidelines, for 21.5 h daily for 25 months.
The results show that rats exposed to microwave radiation had more B-cells and Tcells. These cells are part of the immune system and become activated when the body detects unhealthy bacteria.
The t-cells alert the b-cells that, in turn, produce antibodies to attack the bacteria. What is unusual, is that this experiment was conducted under sterile conditions.
That is one reason it cost so much money.
Even more disturbing results were the effects on tumor growth.
Three types of tumors were identified in various organs: benign, primary, and metastatic tumors.
What are the effects of long-term exposure to low-levels of pulsed 2.45 GHz, the same radiation used for Wi-Fi?
A 16% increase in benign tumors; a 100% increase in metastatic tumors; a 260% increase in primary tumors; and effects on the immune system.
Is this what we want to expose students and teachers to for 6 hours each school day.
....
The World Health Organization classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans.
They based their conclusions on rat studies and studies of people who use wireless phones and studies of people who live near antennas.
In their press release because they mentioned gliomas and wireless phone, some–falsely believed–that only cell phone radiation was potentially carcinogenic and that we didnʼt need to be concerned about other forms of radio frequency radiation. But this is not the case! Wi-Fi radiation is a possible human carcinogen.

[dime]

So what do we do if we live in a building where there is like 20 WIFI routers?

[panacea]

if an organism (that's you) cannot escape an unhealthy situation then you must increase the resilience of the organism through other means.
I used to be pretty neurotic in thinking that wild animal life had a perfect life with no unhealthy factors besides threats of starvation or predators, and that humans were alone in these kind of adverse dangers, but it isn't so. for example, forest elephants who eat a lot of plants are often exposed to toxins in these plants. to combat this, they will seek out clay at the bottom of pools of mud with their trunks and consume it, largely for the purpose of absorbing and expelling the toxins from the plants they eat.

so if I were you I would just work within what's in your control and not worry too much about it, and if the opportunity ever presents itself move away from all the wi-fi or invest in some (expensive) shielding. but remember, most of these adverse dangers noticably affect people with weak health to begin with.

[panacea]

also I think I've mentioned this before but I had a wireless router right next to my body for a few months when I first moved up here and it really irritated me, mostly because of a high pitched sound I heard coming from it if I listened hard and it seemed to drive me insane. I'm not sure if it was the sound or something else making me feel horrible but now I use a cable and it doesn't seem so bad.

One really interesting although meaningless subjective experience I've noticed is that whenever I sleep (earthed) with my laptop in the same room as me (like within 6 feet), even with a cord for internet and sleeping on an earthing bedsheet, I sleep for 1 or 2 hours longer than when it's in another room, "even with the laptop powered off" (the ethernet cable is still powered because the light is on and the adapter is powered on) and this has happened without exception so far.

[dime]

I have a wifi router just under my head under the bed (like 50cm distance) where I sleep :)
The number of these brain tumors is tiny compared to other types, and considering that wifi and cell phones are everywhere.. it's hard to believe that it's a major cause for it.
From what I read the waves are absorbed by the skin and simply converted to heat, probably extremely negligible because I haven't felt any wifi router warm me up so far :D

[Kasper]

I think you also have more sensitive and less sensitive people.
I'm extremely sensitive. And I can assure you that I cannot think straight or sleep well width a WIFI router so close to me.
If I were you, I would, at least try out if you notice any difference (mentally).

Besides that, you can quite easily test if you are (really) sensitive. Just measure you heart rate (and if it is arrhythmic or not) when WIFI router close to you, or if it is out.
My heart beat raises from 45 to 65 (last time I tested it). And becomes irregular.
You might want to let someone else switch out the router, so placebo effect is negligible.

Also, you need to turn out the WIFI adapter of your PC/laptop if you want to do it good.
This adapter is constantly searching for WIFI routers, and if there is no WIFI router, is even searching harder.

For mobile phone, you can turn it on airplane mode, when you sleep/study. Also really helps.
I'm using skype now a lot more. Absolutely love it. In the past, doing phone calls/receiving calls, for some reason I didn't like it all.
I first thought it was just that I just didn't like that kind of communication where I'm not in the same place the other person is.
But the first time I did a phone call using skype, I found out that doing phone calls is actually not that bad at all.

One really interesting although meaningless subjective experience I've noticed is that whenever I sleep (earthed) with my laptop in the same room as me (like within 6 feet), even with a cord for internet and sleeping on an earthing bedsheet, I sleep for 1 or 2 hours longer than when it's in another room, "even with the laptop powered off" (the ethernet cable is still powered because the light is on and the adapter is powered on) and this has happened without exception so far.

Interesting. Is your ethernet cable in someway earthed ?

[overkees]

Is it unplugged? It still sends big voltages even if it is off. I unplug everything in my room if I go to sleep.

[RRM]

The INTERPHONE study showed that adults who used a cell phone for more than 1,640 hours over a 10-year period had a 40% increased risk of developing a brain tumour, called a Glioma.

The following studies of long time exposure have been published:

In 2006 a large Danish study about the connection between mobile phone use and cancer incidence was published. It followed over 420,000 Danish citizens for 20 years and showed no increased risk of cancer.[17]
The 13 nation INTERPHONE project – the largest study of its kind ever undertaken – has now been published and did not find a solid link between mobile phones and brain tumours.[19]
A Danish study (2004) that took place over 10 years found no evidence to support a link.
A Swedish study (2005) that draws the conclusion that "the data do not support the hypothesis that mobile phone use is related to an increased risk of glioma or meningioma."[24]
A British study (2005) that draws the conclusion that "The study suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out."[25]
A German study (2006) that states "In conclusion, no overall increased risk of glioma or meningioma was observed among these cellular phone users; however, for long-term cellular phone users, results need to be confirmed before firm conclusions can be drawn."[26]
A joint study conducted in northern Europe that draws the conclusion that "Although our results overall do not indicate an increased risk of glioma in relation to mobile phone use, the possible risk in the most heavily exposed part of the brain with long-term use needs to be explored further before firm conclusions can be drawn."[27]

This is what is said about that study most recently:

Mar 2012 "Raised risks of glioma with mobile phone use, as reported by one (Swedish) study forming the basis of the IARC's re-evaluation of mobile phone exposure, are not consistent with observed incidence trends in US population data" Little MP
Feb 2012 "Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with use of mobile phones. There were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma at the highest exposure levels, but biases and error prevent a causal interpretation. The possible effects of long-term heavy use of mobile phones require further investigation." INTERPHONE Study Group.
Nov 2011 "the trend in the accumulating evidence is increasingly against the hypothesis that mobile phone use can cause brain tumors in adults."Swerdlow AJ et al
Sep 2011 "There were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma in long-term mobile phone users with high RF exposure and of similar, but apparently much smaller, increases in meningioma risk. The uncertainty of these results requires that they be replicated before a causal interpretation can be made." Cardis E et al
Oct 2011 "There was no increase in risk of acoustic neuroma with ever regular use of a mobile phone or for users who began regular use 10 years or more before the reference date. Elevated odds ratios observed at the highest level of cumulative call time could be due to chance, reporting bias or a causal effect. As acoustic neuroma is usually a slowly growing tumour, the interval between introduction of mobile phones and occurrence of the tumour might have been too short to observe an effect, if there is one." INTERPHONE Study Group.
May 2011 "studies published under the Interphone project and others produced negative results and are characterised by the substantial underestimation of the risk of tumour.
However, also in the Interphone studies a clear and statistically significant increase of ipsilateral head tumours (gliomas, neuromas and parotid gland tumours) is quite common in people having used MPs since or for ≥ 10 years. And also the metaanalyses by Hardell and other Authors, including only the literature data on ipsilateral tumours in people having used MPs since or for ≥ 10 years - and so also part of the Interphone data - still show statistically significant increases of head tumours." Levis AG
Feb 2011 "The Interphone Study on brain cancer rests upon a case-control design with recall of past exposures recorded with substantial inaccuracy and low participation rates." Olsen J

The U.S. Air Force completed a study in 1984 at a cost of $4.5 million dollars.
They exposed rats to pulsed 2450 MHz frequencies ...

Where can we read it?

The World Health Organization classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans.

This means that there "could be some risk" of carcinogenicity, so additional research into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones needs to be conducted.
Why does it say "could be"?
Because it has not been proven yet, and has to be properly researched first.

[Kasper]

This means that there "could be some risk" of carcinogenicity, so additional research into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones needs to be conducted.
Why does it say "could be"?
Because it has not been proven yet, and has to be properly researched first.

As it comes to carcinogenicity in humans, there are some studies indicating other result indeed.
As it comes, that in general humans are affected negatively by 2.4 GHz, I'm quire sure that this is true.

How bad it is, I find more questionable. It might be comparable width living in a dusty house? Or maybe comparable width smoking cigarretes?
In the buteyko context, I think it lowers CP.

As asthmatics are much more affected by air quality, I think that hypersensitives in this context are also much more affected.
Non-asthmaticsare also affected by air quality, but it's much less a problem. People who are not hypersensitive to 2.4 GHz might be also affected, but not that badly that it becomes a real problem.

But still, you are really emphasizing this "could be".
And emphasizing that it has not been proven yet.
I think you should look at this the other way around.
As long as it has not been proven that those radiation has no negative health implications (especially on children), this whole 2.4 GHz 'experiment' should stop.

Here is some study on radiofrequency radiation exposure from 800-1900 Mhz-rated cellular telephones.
This clearly does indicate that it can affect the developing brain in mice.
http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/ ... 00312.html
Overall, the mice exposed in-utero to radiation were hyperactive, had decreased memory, and decreased anxiety.

[overkees]

I think researches like these are very inteteresting:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20560769

[RRM]

As long as it has not been proven that those radiation has no negative health implications (especially on children), this whole 2.4 GHz 'experiment' should stop.

Sounds reasonable to me, indeed.
But thats just me...