Is Wifi dangerous?

Discussion in 'hardware' started by Osaban, Jun 29, 2013.

  1. BoerenkoolMetWorst

    BoerenkoolMetWorst Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,868
    Location:
    Outer space
    I did some searching on the subject as well and whether you think/believe it's a scam or not, there seem to be 'fake' versions being sold as well. The 'real' versions should show negative ions on an ion meter.
     
  2. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Yes they are scams, been going on for years, for example: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/06/qtinc.shtm is from 2003.
     
  3. roger_m

    roger_m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Posts:
    8,627
  4. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    There was no evidence provided by the advertiser to show it was true (the only evidence showed it was no more effective than a placebo). That shows their claims were not true and that is false advertising.
     
  5. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Yes I am very skeptical to say the least, and how on earth can one see/know wich ones that are genuine(if there are any at all) or fake?

    Also, to look at it from the other side, could there be or are there any known negative effects by using one?
     
  6. roger_m

    roger_m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Posts:
    8,627
    The vendor I purchased mine from is going to email me a video showing it being tested with an ion tester.
     
  7. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    And what does that prove (I could point an ion tester at a smoke alarm) and get a positive result.
     
  8. roger_m

    roger_m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Posts:
    8,627
    Well, it is supposed to show the number of ions in the pendant, with more ions being better.

    Now, I'm not saying that these pendants actually do anything, but I'm also not ruling it out at the moment.
     
  9. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I´m not sure if it´s really dangerous, but it can not be good for health, that´s for sure.

    Same goes for DECT telephone systems. :)
     
  10. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    How ?
     
  11. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Ah, I understand :)
     
  12. Keatah

    Keatah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2011
    Posts:
    1,029
    All I know is I feel better in an ineffable way with my wifi routers turned off.
     
  13. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    Radio is harmless ... in fact, radiation is good for you. Honest.
    It's only really high doses of x-ray that should bother you.
    Mrk
     
  14. Baserk

    Baserk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Posts:
    1,321
    Location:
    AmstelodamUM
    UV-B radiation blasted on your skin by the sun, causing the skin to produce vitamine-D, is nice radiation indeed. Your bones really appreciate it.
    It helps your immune system not to go into turbo-mode, also helps against f.i. insomnia, depression. Moderate amounts are quite essential for heatlhy living.
     
  15. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,041
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Yeah, right - if you have cancer and radiation treatment is a last ditch option.

    Sorry, but you are wrong. While there is no solid proof (yet) cell phone and WiFi RF radiation exposure is bad, there is plenty of uncontested proof that high levels of RF, and long term exposure to lower levels of RF is clearly, and without a doubt, lethal.

    Stand in front of a RADAR, communications microwave, or a tropo site antenna and see how you fare after that.

    Just for the record, I was a "Ground Radio Communications Equipment Technician" (304x4, 2E1x3) in the USAF for 24 years.
    So based on that, you can believe me or not, but I say again, as someone with some experience with RF radiation, you are wrong. Radio is NOT harmless. And it is not good for you either.

    Right. So is some thermal radiation, for arthritis pain for example. But UV and thermal radiation is not RF.
     
  16. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    Radar, a KW or MW range equipment vs. mW wi-fi routers ... hmmm.
    For that matter, drink 12 liters of water (3 gallons) at once and die.
    Water, the essential part of every living thing - will kill you.
    Just take three times your daily average at once.
    Not more than that, three times!

    Let's see - ~KW radar, that's one million times more than a ~mW router. So that means exposure of one second to a radar equals roughly two weeks non stop exposure to wi-fi router. At the same distance of course. So sitting on top of a radar is not quite like using the Internet.

    That's less damage than what you get by eating processed food.

    As a physicist, I worked with radioactive sources for five years, trust me on that.

    Some more trivia:

    60% of our planet's heat comes from radioactive decay in the mantle and core.

    France has among the lowest cancer incidents in the western world, and yet its natural background radiation is about twice higher than most other countries, because of the rock composition underneath - and it is actually equal to what you have in Chernobyl now, due to the disaster, where the overall radiation has increased only twofold, mostly due to Cs deposits. So no biggie.

    Radio does not interact with our molecules. Therman excitation is possible, but quite likely negligent. We can do a proper calculation, taking a certain energy output from the router and spreading it over a few kg of human mass at a certain distance etc.

    Mrk
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2013
  17. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,041
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Of course, sitting on top of a RADAR is not the same as next to a router. But you made a general statement and said, "Radio is harmless". That is not true. Then you went on to say it is "good for you". Physicist or not, that is not true. So sorry, but no, I won't trust you on that - unless you can provide a link to a whitepaper or recognized medical journal article to support such a claim.

    That's being a bit overly paranoid. The field strength is too low plus routers use omni, or semi-omni antennas so the RF dispersion pattern is very wide as soon as it departs.

    As someone who understands radio electronics (and the Laws of Physics that dictate how they work), I would be MUCH more concerned holding a cell phone next to my head several hours a day than I would about a router sitting feet or yards away.

    IF I were worried about the RF from my wireless router, I would have already gone insane thinking about my wireless PC sitting on the floor by my feet, or worse, my wireless laptop sitting on my lap! :blink: :doubt: :ouch:
     
  18. roger_m

    roger_m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Posts:
    8,627
    Maybe I've bought a fake, as the test video shows a high positive ion count. I will look into this some more though.

    Edit: Apparently ion testers do not show the ions as being negative, as shown in this video -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrvATHyAWAs- so I probably have not bought a fake.
     
  19. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,041
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    I am not following. That video is talking about "negative ions" and the tester is measuring negative ions in the pendant, and his hand. And it worked.

    Also, note that not all ions are negative. A cation is a positive ion where an anion is a negative ion.
     
  20. NormanF

    NormanF Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Posts:
    2,874
    Oh for heaven's sake - you have a plastic box thingy transmitting a radio signal! Your radio is just as lethal as your computer's router! We should ban listening to music on the radio because listening to it can be harmful to your health. o_O
     
  21. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,041
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Now that's getting silly. A radio "receiver" does not transmit RF. It is safe to "listen" to music on a radio. Just don't climb the transmitting tower when transmitting.
     
  22. Baserk

    Baserk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Posts:
    1,321
    Location:
    AmstelodamUM
    Nope, RF is a different beast indeed, especially when big like a radar.
    I know that in the EU (NL and BE) former HAWK AA radar personal show to have a higher chance of blood-related disease (depends also on security protocol tbh).

    I wouldn't worry about wifi, usual suspect is extensive phone-to-ear usage like B_B mentioned.
    Woe to them having poor reception and attention deficit.
     
  23. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    A bit OT, but my mother used to own a Sony Ericsson mobile phone, it would give you a headache even if you talked for only one minute. That cannot be healthy. :)

    I wouldn´t be surprised if a lot of people will get sick in the future because of extensive usage of WIFI, DECT and mobile phones.
     
  24. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    9,252
    -http://www.uanr.com/wifiscans/-

    However, wide-area APs can run at ~700 mW. But they're typically up on towers :)
     
  25. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    I wouldn't say no interaction at all, as all EM waves in the end carry both an electric and magnetic field. You are correct in saying that any excitations/interactions would not be highly significant. The mere fact that we maintain homeostasis in such conditions proves that the overall system process in the body is not adversely affected. However, I agree about the calculations - perhaps we do need more testing.

    But even these can be harmful under specific circumstances, it's thankfully not the general case :)

    I agree, but in general I also tend to think the SAR limits are safe enough as defined by the norms for USA and EU. Also, there are effects not considered here: bodily fluids, medicines taken by the person, etc. - any kind of molecular interaction has an effect on chemical kinetics (as well as physical kinetics) even if by means of simple thermal energy transfer. So yes, I do think this requires further testing and I would maintain a small bit of caution but not about routers sitting feet or yards away.

    I personally think that we should trust the current safety norms, because, let's face it - the people who did those tests are probably just as dependent on these devices as the rest of us. It makes no sense to lie to the population because it directly affects them or any "powers that be" as well..


    Source: student studying a hodge-podge mix of experimental science and electronics. As such, having been a strong believer in experimental analysis, I do not believe in "scalar energy" because it does not agree with any practically observed phenomenon. Note that there are many things in science which were practically observed first before theory came about. :D
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.