6391

That which is looked upon by one generation as the apex of human knowledge
is often considered an absurdity by the next,
and that which is regarded as a superstition in one century,
may form the basis of science for the following one!
Paracelsus

Wireless networking is one of the most popular innovations in the computing world, and probably the most revolutionary one since the popularization of Internet itself. And it's no mystery why. Cabling is a pain. I use this WallStreet PowerBook that I'm typing these words on at several locations around the house, and in order to go online from wherever, I have to string phone extension cords and drag a modem cord around. Or... I could buy a wireless connectivity PC Card for the WallStreet and AirPort cards for my my two newer laptops and an Airport Base Station, and waltz around from place to place blissfully untethered. No more modem cables and phone cords, and I could largely dispense with my wired Ethernet network as well. But I'm not going to do it. Aside from one wireless keyboard/mouse combo that isn't being used, this house is a wireless-free zone -- at least in a computer context, and likely to remain so until I'm convinced that the electromagnetic pollution caused by wireless communication frequencies is not a health hazard. As yet I'm not.

I hasten to add that I'm not staking out a strong advocacy position that RF emissions from these systems are harmful. I'm an ignoramus as far as radio transmission engineering goes, and I'm not a health care professional or expert. My own policy in the matter is based on the precautionary principle -- that the burden of proof rightly rests on positively determining the harmlessness of wireless radio frequency emissions rather than proving harm.

What I am suggesting is that the issue of wireless networking ought to be addressed with a lot more prudent caution than seems to be the case. The thought of classrooms full of schoolchildren using AirPort-equipped eMacs or iBooks day in and day out, being exposed to radio frequency emissions at close range, makes me distinctly uneasy given the level of ignorance on this issue.

To anyone who suggests that saying this amounts to "FUD" or "fearmongering," I repeat that I do not know whether this sort of radio frequency exposure is a significant health hazard, but neither do you know for sure that it is NOT a significant health hazard. One thing I do know is that I take rote assurances of safety from industry and government regulatory sources with a large grain of salt. I want to see the research data and the methodology behind it on which such assurances are based.

Patronizing affirmations by persons with conflicted interests in this issue that any such speculation is irresponsible hysteria, and that there is "nothing to worry about" are annoying. There indeed may be nothing to worry about, but I don't think anyone can make that categorical assurance given the current level of knowledge/ignorance on these matters.

Allegations of a wireless hazard have come to a head in Cook County, Illinois, (near Chicago), where some parents of students at Oak Park Elementary School District No. 97, are suing the school over alleged potential health risks associated with radio frequency exposure. Students in the Oak Park School system are issued on an "as needed basis" Apple iBooks equipped with an AirPort wireless card that receives data from an AirPort hub transmitting an 802.11b Wi-Fi signal. The District set up a wireless wide-area network to connect its schools to one another in 1995, and subsequently wireless networks added inside each school to provide wireless computer and Internet connectivity in classrooms.

Ron Baiman, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, who has two daughters in the District, is quoted saying that the Oak Park school board ignored his and other parents' questions about wireless's potential dangers after he brought district administrators studies that point to health dangers from wireless transmission standards.

Baiman maintains that there is "considerable uncertainty about what the long-term effects of this kind of non-ionizing radiation could be, particularly on young children," and that "about 75 percent of nonindustry-sponsored studies show some biological effect that occurs because of wireless radiation exposure."

According to one report cited, "effects of exposure include reduced absorption of calcium, headaches, and even the threat of senility."

That study is available in PDF format here:
http://www.elektrosmognews.de/salfordjan2003.pdf

The legal complaint by the Oak Park parents was filed Sept. 26 in the Circuit Court of Cook County. A hearing before Judge Nancy Arnold is scheduled for next February. The lawsuit reads, in part:

"Specifically, the Defendants have installed wireless networks in each of the school buildings under its jurisdiction. In so doing, the Defendants have ignored the substantial body of evidence that high frequency electro-magnetic radiation poses substantial and serious health risks, particularly to growing children. The Defendants have thereby breached their duties of care to the children of District 97....

"District 97 however failed to adequately examine and assess the potential health risks that wireless LANs pose to humans, particularly children who are still growing....

"In fact, there is a substantial and growing body of scientific literature studying and outlining the serious health risks that exposure to low intensity, but high radio frequency (�RF�) radiation poses to human beings, particularly children. For example, responsible scientists have reported that prolonged exposure to low intensity RF radiation can break down DNA strands, cause chromosome aberrations and break down the blood-brain barrier, thereby permitting toxic proteins to invade the brain. And, these occur at radiation levels below what a child would be exposed to by sitting in front of a computer on a wireless network....

"Other researchers have observed other potential health risks that they believe are traceable to exposure to low intensity RF radiation at levels that are at or below the levels that children would experience by using wireless LANs in a classroom. In fact, at present, the lawyers for the Plaintiffs and their clients have collected more than 400 scientific articles, summaries and references outlining health risks from low intensity RF radiation exposure, all or most of which have been researched and written after 1995. By way of example only, attached as Exhibit 2 is a listing and a summary of thirty-one articles, all of which deal with the potential health risks from prolonged exposure to low intensity RF radiation, i.e., radiation given off by, among other things, wireless LANs....

"Defendants have stated publicly that they have examined the current, prevailing government regulations relating to safety of wireless technology and the system installed in District 97 poses no health risks to humans. This statement is false. The only U.S. standards that relate in any way to radiation exposure were developed by the F.C.C. before 1993 and relate only to thermal radiation. The radiation that Plaintiffs object to here is non-thermal and the federal government has not promulgated any standards relating to this. 20. The state of scientific uncertainty is further reflected by the fact that different nations have different exposure standards."

A link to download the entire text of the complaint can be found here:
http://www.op97.k12.il.us/lawsuit.html

Oak Park District school officials maintain that Wi-Fi "doesn't pose any significant health risks," but has also cautioned students and teachers "to stay at least eight inches away" from the Airport hubs.

For an exhaustive presentation of the Oak Park School District's side of the story, visit here:
http://www.op97.k12.il.us/tech/Wireless_files/frame.htm

According to Milt Bowling, executive director of the Canadian Electromagnetic Radiation Task Force in a recent alive magazine article, "there are now decades of research and more than 20,000 studies, some showing DNA breakage, chronic fatigue, cancer, and other fatal or harmful results [from exposure to microwave radiation]." Bowling cites a $7 million study released last year by the California Department of Health Services which found that exposure to household electricity is linked to increased risk of male and female breast cancer, miscarriages, suicide, Lou Gehrig's disease (ALS), Alzheimer's, sudden cardiac death, and leukemia and bone cancers in children and adults.

Also noted by Bowling is a recent study that confirmed as little as a two-minute cellphone call causing the blood brain barrier to leak, and another study showing that even after hanging up from a two-minute call, the subject's electrical pattern in the brain was still altered a full hour later.

In researching this column, I've discovered that there seem to be precious little research data available on the issue of possible health effects of exposure to electromagnetic emissions from computer communications specifically. Most studies in this area have focused mainly on cellphones, and while those findings are not irrelevant, it would be nice to think that someone is looking into computer networks in this context -- particularly in classrooms and offices with high concentrations of networked devices.

An 2000 article in IEEE Spectrum notes that:

"...despite early claims by cell phone makers, little of this research proves that mobile phones are safe. Few of the studies on whether RF exposure is dangerous to animal tissue have involved standard toxicology work -- the sort that a chemical or a pharmaceutical company would do to gain regulatory approval for a new product. In addition, little of the research deals specifically with the kinds of pulse-modulated energy transmitted by newer generations of digital phones or with the exposure conditions typical of those produced by cell phones. ...

"Brain cancer takes years or decades to develop, and these studies say nothing about future risks. Detecting small or long-term cancer risks is not an easy task. Detecting small increases in risk would require large studies that are hard to control and usually are controversial in their interpretation. Any valid study would also have to assess an individual's use of mobile phones over a decade or more, an assessment complicated by the rapid technological developments in this industry."

Apple's AirPort networking system operates in the 2.4 GHz Frequency band at an output power of 15 dBm, while cellphones use the 800MHz to 1,990 MHz range. The power output level of cellular phones can range from 0.006 of a watt to 0.6 of a watt for handheld units and three to six watts for portable units. 2.4 GHz is even farther into microwave territory than the cellphone frequencies. Microwave ovens operate at 2.45 gigahertz -- a frequency that causes water, glucose, and fat molecules to rub together and heat up.

Users will be exposed to emissions from wireless LANs for much longer periods of time than all but the most addicted cellphone users. Could the cumulative effect ultimately be as bad or worse? I'd like to know before I expose myself and my loved ones to wireless networking emissions. Microwaves are generally known to be unfriendly to living tissue, and it occurs that zapping yourself with them on an ongoing basis, even at low levels, is not the brightest plan.

Microwave News reports
that data from ten studies of EMFs and childhood leukemia indicate that the association with measured magnetic fields is "remarkably consistent across studies," according to Dr. Sander Greenland of the University of California, Los Angeles.

Fortune.com's David Kirkpatrick writes: "I've written about the potential health effects of electromagnetic fields from cell phones and other devices intermittently for over a decade. The conclusion of every article has been that simply not enough is known to say whether cell phones are safe, and that in the absence of reassurance from science, caution... is wisest."

Many scientists believe that because radiation from cellphones does not have enough energy to break chemical bonds, it cannot damage cells. The only way damage could occur, they say, is if the radio waves heated tissues up. But British research in 2002 by molecular toxicologist David de Pomerai at the University of Nottingham, showed that radio waves can cause biological effects that are not due to heating. He found that nematode worms exposed to radio waves showed an increase in fertility - the opposite effect from what would be expected from heating (New Scientist print edition, 9 February, 2002).

de Pomerai insists that a consensus is emerging that non-ionizing radiation can indirectly damage DNA by affecting its repair system. If the DNA repair mechanism does not work as well as it should, mutations in cells could accumulate, with disastrous consequences. "Cells with unrepaired DNA damage are likely to be far more aggressively cancerous," he says.

A Finnish study that found clear effects in the laboratory on human cells after one hour's exposure to cell phone-type radiation. The radiation seems to affect a variety of proteins in the cells, leading them to shrink. Though there is no evidence that this is a health risk, some scientists worry that such changes in the brain--right next to the phone--might increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, which could be dangerous.

In a document posted on the Web in February 2000, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration noted that "[T]here is currently insufficient scientific basis for concluding either that wireless communication technologies are safe or that they pose a [health] risk to millions of users."

Applelinks reader Robert Eye, addressing this issue in a letter to Moore's MailBag last September, noted that:

"Regarding base station radiation, you have to also consider the directivity of the antenna and its gain to determine the power density radiated over a given surface area or volume of tissue. These are the real numbers you want when being concerned with RF non-ionizing radiation.

"Much of the recent results involving epidemiologic studies on human populations have been inconclusive at best, but it is worthy of more reasonable and reasoned study, as are the controlled cell and mammalian studies."

"It seems a lot of initial study findings get lots of press, but further scrutiny and problems with those studies do not get much, if any, attention, nor do studies that contradict prior results (I see a similar trend in the media when it comes to studies on the family)."

The Irish parliament -- the Dail's Communications Committee has just announced a major investigation into the safety of mobile phones in terms of radiation and damage to the brain. The inquiry, which will start in the new year, will draw on international studies.

An estimated 70 percent of Ireland's population uses cellphones. According to Noel O'Flynn of Fianna Fail, chair of the communications committee, while there has been no conclusive scientific evidence to prove any negative long-term health effect of mobile phone usage, some recent studies have suggested otherwise. British research, for instance, is cited as having found that using mobile phones does affect brain activity and that there are significant gaps in our scientific knowledge of the risks, and scientists have warned of potential dangers to young people in particular, since the head and nervous system are still developing into the teenage years.

Britain's health ministry authorities have recommended that in line with a precautionary approach, use of mobile phones by children under the age of 16 should be discouraged for non-essential calls.

Mr O'Flynn also noted to The Irish Independent that recent research in Finland suggests radiation from mobile phones causes changes in the brain and concluded that even low level emissions from handsets are damaging. Additionally, he is quoted saying that: "Swedish scientists found that mobile phones damage key brain cells and could trigger Alzheimer's Disease while the World Health Organization last year warned parents against letting their children spend too much time on mobile phones because tests showed higher electromagnetic waves in places where mobiles are frequently used."

"At the moment it is too soon to reach a definitive verdict on health risks from mobile phones but I stress neither has research given it the all-clear..."

U.S. patent 6,506,148 notes that:

"Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near1/2 Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient amplitudes to cause such excitation. It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set."

A report on Bioelectromagnetics (24:535-545, 2003. � 2003) by Wiley-Liss, Inc., finds that in a study of the effect of sinusoidal 50 Hz, 0.2 mT magnetic fields on the red blood cells (RBCs) and heart functions of Albino rats:

"...results indicated that exposure of the animals to 50 Hz, 0.2 mT magnetic fields resulted in the decrease of RBCs membrane elasticity and permeability and changes in the molecular structure of Hb. The ECG of the exposed animals was considerably altered.

"The data also indicated that there was no sign of repair in the newly generated RBCs structure and the ECG after removing the animals from the magnetic field, which indicates that the blood generating system was severely injured.

"The injuries in the heart of the animals were attributed to the loss of some physiological functions of the RBCs as a result of exposures of the rats to the magnetic field."

Researchers in Sweden have found that radiation emissions from cellphones could lead to conditions such as Alzheimer's Disease.

The immune systems of rats exposed by scientists at the University of Lun to as
little as 2-minute zaps of microwave pulses similar to those from a mobile phone
were found to be damaged, which in turn "allowed dangerous toxins and proteins to travel from the blood and enter the brain. Once in the brain tissue, there was a higher risk of developing brain or nerve diseases, such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's or multiple sclerosis.

The neurologist who carried out the study is quoted saying that: "We saw the
opening of the blood-brain barrier even after a short exposure to radiation at the
same level as mobile phones."

A link between mobile phone use and memory loss was established in a controlled study by a hospital in Bristol, England. Richie Blackmore, a professor of physiology at Oxford university and former lead guitarist for the '60s rock group Deep Purple, was quoted saying that "There is evidence of an adverse effect on cognitive function, memory and attention [when using mobile phones."

One of the effects of exposure of human tissue to electromagnetic radiation is thought to be the production of free radicals, which are uncharged groups of atoms containing an unpaired electron, that are very chemically reactive. According to Cyril W. Smith and Simon Best in their book, "Electromagnetic Man, "living organisms need free radicals in order to be able to use oxygen to get energy, but also require means of getting rid of them when no longer required. Free radicals may be produced by either chemical or electrical processes, and can give rise to unwanted chemical reactions that may lead to disease."

Under normal circumstances, the body's free radical scavenging mechanisms work well enough, but increased biological stress caused by emotional factors, physical trauma, chemical toxicity, or infection -- or electromagnetic radiation -- can simultaneously increase free radical production while inhibiting the body's free radical defenses. Long-term consequences may include various inflammatory degenerative disease conditions often associated with immune system dysfunction, or even cancer.

Free radical reactions are only harmful when they get out of control, say Smith and Best -- this risk being "the price organisms must pay for evolving beyond the anaerobic single cell by using oxygen to increase their efficiency in converting nutrients to available energy.

However, they note that our environment is increasingly polluted with synthetic chemicals and electromagnetic fields which contribute to the biological stress that increases free radical production and overloads the body's free radical regulatory systems.

Until there is a lot more research available on this issue from disinterested third parties, my own personal policy of "prudent avoidance" will include prudently avoiding wireless LANs, the same as I refuse to use cellular and avoid cordless phones. Happily, in my case that has not been difficult so far, but I'm concerned that it may become more so as wireless technology becomes more intricately integrated into laptop computers for instance. For many others who will be exposed in work or educational settings, prudent avoidance will be virtually impossible. My kids are grown, but if they were still of school age, I would not want them sitting in classrooms full of wireless enables computers every day.

As I implied at the beginning of this article, I expect that some people who read it will be annoyed that I brought the topic up. There is widespread and understandable enthusiasm for the convenience of wireless technology. I could be that I and others are being hyper-cautious about this, and if it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that exposure to low-level radio emissions is safe, I'm willing to listen. However, I want to hear it from sources other than those financed by industry or politically-sensitive government regulatory agencies, or from techno-enthusiast cheerleaders.

For more information on this topic, here are some useful links:

http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/phones/phones.jsp

A U.S. Food and Drug Administration Web site addresses the issue to some degree, although is focused on mainly cellphones:
http://www.fda.gov/cellphones

Two major statements on biological effects from exposure to non-thermal levels of radiofrequency radiation are linked at:
http://www.emrnetwork.org/news/news.htm
and
http://www.emrnetwork.org/news/news.htm
See entries for 10/23/02 and 9/14/02.

http://www.emrnetwork.org/

Going to http://www.ieee.org and searching on "rf radiation hazard" will produce a list of references.

http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc28/AUT29-F.pdf (master citation list, as on 8 January 2003, in use by the subgroup SC-4 of the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety)

http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc28/sc4/SC-4%20Minutes-June%202002.pdf

http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/embs/comar/rf_mw.htm

Tags: MooresViews ï

Login † or † Register † †