Wi-Fi causes child cancer? (and fair-y tale use)

Won't somebody think of the children? It's Monday's IT Blogwatch: in which Aunty Beeb scares us all over Wi-Fi "radiation". Not to mention a Disney parody explanation of copyright law and fair use...

BBC TV's Panorama series speaks of, "a Wi-Fi revolution...":

...with offices, homes and classrooms going wireless - but there is concern the technology could carry health risks. The Government insists Wi-Fi is safe, but a Panorama investigation shows that radio frequency radiation levels in some schools are up to three times the level found in the main beam of intensity from mobile phone masts. There have been no studies on the health effects of Wi-Fi equipment, but thousands on mobile phones and masts.

The radiation Wi-Fi emits is similar to that from mobile phone masts. It is an unavoidable by-product of going wireless ... In 2000, Sir William Stewart ... headed the government's inquiry into the safety of mobile phone masts and health. He felt the scientific research was sufficient to apply a precautionary approach when siting masts near schools ... But what about Wi-Fi? The technology is similar to mobile phone masts and in use in 70 per cent of secondary schools and 50 per cent of primary schools.
...
Readings ... showed the ... signal strength to be three times higher in the school classroom using Wi-Fi than [that of] a mobile phone mast. The findings are particularly significant because children's skulls are thinner and still forming and tests have shown they absorb more radiation than adults.

Sepp Hasslberger looks worried:

If you put a frog in boiling water, it will jump out. However, if you put a frog in cold water and gradually heat the water, you can cook the frog because the frog's body will adjust to the slight changes in temperature and it will not notice it is being cooked. Well, the same thing might be happening to an unsuspecting public - a public that has not been informed about the real dangers of microwave radiation from cell phones, WiFi and other high-frequency-radiation emitting devices and antennas. The truth of the matter, your cell phone and your WiFi might very well indeed be making you and those around you sick!
...
The increasing popularity of wi-fi comes on the heels of the explosive growth in wireless mobile telephones, and amid heightened concerns over the health hazards of saturating levels of electromagnetic radiation. Microwaves at current exposure levels are linked to brain damage, DNA damage, brain tumours, cancers, microwave sickness, impairment of cognitive functions, impairment of reproduction and fertility, affecting humans, rodents, birds, and bees.

Martin Sharp adds:

Below are a long list of people who can not enjoy [Wi-Fi] ... because it makes them ill ... John Fox (Teacher) , Robert Thinker (Home Owner) , Michael Bevington (Teacher) , Tony (Resident in flat) , Kate Figes (Author) , Ryan Warne (Furniture Worker) , Poppy Rhodes (Journalist) , David Dean (Councillor, London) , Sarah Dacre (former TV Executive) , Brian Stein (Chief Executive)
...
Additionally, I personally know of several other examples where people have been made ill by the presence of Wi-fi and have recovered afterwards ... None of these symptoms occurred before Wi-fi was installed, and all are commonly associated with findings from research into other comparable forms of microwave radiation.

But Bill Thompson scoffs:

It’s depressing to see this sort of scaremongering, especially as I’ve just heard Radio 4’s Today say that wifi networks ‘can give out more radiation than mobile phone masts’ with no context. As I’ve already pointed out, there’s no evidence of problems, there’s no mechanism that would lead us to think there are going to be problems, and apart from claims from people who say that they are magically sensitive to wifi - and yet seem not to notice TV or radio signals coursing through their bodies - there is no reason to limit the use of wifi.

But of course it’s a new technology that can’t be proven to be safe, largely because nothing can be proven to be safe, and appeals to the sort of scientifically illiterate campaigners and journalists who like attention and ratings.

Glenn Fleishman, too:

The measurement of Wi-Fi signal strength and a cell base station signal are made at different points. The measurement for Wi-Fi is at 1 meter, and the cell base station at 100m. At those disparate differences, Wi-Fi comes out three times stronger ... [But] the point isn’t a cell base station radiating to a user, but the cell phone someone carries produces a signal that reaches the base station. No measurement appears to have been taken of a cell phone in use.

Lest we forget, the Guardian writes, “The Health Protection Agency says a person sitting within a Wi-Fi hotspot for a year receives the same dose of radio waves as a person using a mobile phone for 20 minutes.”

Scientists quoted in the program apparently say that using thermal effects—heat produced by exposure to electromagnetic radiation—to determine risk isn’t enough to, well, determine risk.

Alan Argoed agrees:

Keeping in mind I haven’t watched it yet, am not a scientist and know very little about what happens when 802.11 networks get busy… legal WiFi kit operates at very low power outputs (0.1 watt) compared to the average mobile phone handset (of nearer 2 watts), I'm personally more worried about risks from a saturated mobile network than a busy WiFi cloud.

Anyway, if you’ve got more exciting things to do on Monday evening, an on demand webcast will be available to watch on the Beeb’s website.

Daniel Davies sums up his thoughts:

From the "makes you weep" department

Last week on Panorama: We fearlessly expose the pseudoscientific loons of Scientology.

Next week on Panorama: Are WiFi signals giving your children cancer?

It's the journalistic equivalent of "please don't put your life in the hands of a rock'n'roll band, they'll throw it all away".

Buffer overflow:

Around the Net

• the storage anarchist: virtual provisioning catch-22
• Wagner James Au: Virtual World Population: 50 million by 2011
• Educated Guesswork: Steelcape and Firewall Traversing VPNs
• Mini-Microsoft: Ack! As in Ack!quisition...
• Threadwatch: Adware Maker Sues Anti-Spyware Software Company
• Between the Lines: Putting data mining in perspective
• Mike Kavis: Are you running IT like it's your business

Around Computerworld

• Preston Gralla: Russia's opening shot in the cyber Cold War
• Michael R. Farnum: Observations on IDS / IPS
• Evan Koblentz: HP garage joins National Register of Historic Places
• Martin MC Brown: Halo 2 vs Halo 3
• Martin MC Brown: Enterprise backup for Macs
• Shark Tank: What's all the excitement about?

Previously in IT Blogwatch

• FCC OKs iPhone, but iPhony delay (and moon fishing)
• Amazon antagonizes Apple with DRM-free music (and but is it art?)
• Sun's CEO slaps down Microsoft (and power-tool dragsters)
• No YouTube for you, private! (and Gears of Bore)
• Microsoft's forceful FOSS fight (and electric Harleys)
• Older posts

And finally... YouTube - A Fair(y) Use Tale [hat tip: Michael Geist]

Richi Jennings is an independent technology and marketing consultant, specializing in email, blogging, Linux, and computer security. A 20 year, cross-functional IT veteran, he is also an analyst at Ferris Research. Contact Richi at blogwatch@richi.co.uk.