I've heard a lot of wacky things in regards to technology, but this may take the cake. A group of people in Santa Fe are claiming to be allergic to wi-fi. Now I don't doubt that there is a possibility of people being sensative to particular forms of energy or radio broadcasts, but something about how these people are describing their problems makes me wonder if they're just looking for a way to complain. It seems that if you're allergic to cell phones you'd be sick pretty much all the time, especially in a major city like Santa Fe. And with wi-fi being so prevelant it seems like it would almost be impossible to go outside. I don't know, this just sounds fishy to me. What do you think?
I hope that cities are not forced into taking action based on a few people's complaint regarding this so called "allergy" to the electrocurrents created by cell phones and wi-fi. If there is no testing available to see if this is truly an allergy, then I don't see any reason to assume this is a real thing.
YanıtlaSilI think it is much more likely that these "allergic" reactions (such as headaches and chest pain) are created by the anxiety associated to make-believe paranoid thinking. I mean, come on, where is the factual proof that this actually exist? I've seen no peer reviewed studies reagrding this. If someone has one, please copy link in a reply.
This is the one confirmed case that I am aware of: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-450995/The-woman-needs-veil-protection-modern-life.html
YanıtlaSilThis woman is reactive to strong electromagnetic fields and has been extensively studied. Doctors studied her with both real cellular phones and "placebos" (plastic shells with the right weight) and she reacted only to the real mccoys.
However, unlike the Santa Fe group, she does not insist that others alter their lifestyles to meet her disability. She has constructed her house to be a kind of faraday cage and wears signal-proof clothing when venturing into the city.
This is definitely one of those cases where the question of "reasonable accommodation", as spelled out in the ADA, is going to be tested. Ramps, elevators, and special software to allow the legally-blind to read PC screens have been ruled "reasonable accomodations", but - for example - banning peanuts from schools for those with severe allergies have not... although some school has voluntarily done so.
But the problem with WiFi is it is its ubiquity. If there is a peanut in the room, you can stay on the other side of the room. A wifi signal will seek you out.
This will be an interesting case to watch.
Actually it's quite easy to test if someone is allergic to radio signals - simply put them in front of an RF transmitter with a controller set to turn it on and off at random and see if they respond. It wouldn't do much legal good though - for a start, those bringing the case have little reason to undergo the inconvenience and expense of professional testing (A good sample would be at least a week of study). Then there is the standard quack problem: For every test run, there is an excuse. "Oh, the frequency isn't right," "But the continuous wave pattern isn't realistic for the communication system," "I had a cold that masked the symptoms," or "So I wasn't affected, but thousands of others might be." Set the standard of disproof high enough and it can never be reached.
YanıtlaSilThere is a story told by technicians, which is in all probability nothing more than an urban legend, that tells of a school installing a wireless network. Soon after the access points were fitted the teachers started complaining, saying they were coming down with headaches and tiredness and the pupils were having trouble concentrating because of the effect of the radiation. The technical staff listened to the complaints, and calmly explained that although the hardware was installed, it was not yet turned on.
There is an alternate version that substitutes a phone mast in a village for a wireless network in a school.
Nomad, there was nothing in that article about her being tested. There was one doctor who claimed to have witnessed anecdotal evidence mentioned, and a study that showed people with such allergies didn't respond any different to the "real McCoy" than the placebos.
YanıtlaSilThere is nothing in that article that confirms anything as far as her symptoms really being linked to electromagnetic radiation. It says her symptoms are real but also says the reason is a self diagnosis after some time spent on Google. Sorry, but unless you have this "study" you mention, I am going with the fact that there is overwhelmingly no evidence to show low powered electromagnetic frequencies like the one in question due to the fact that it is physically impossible for these frequencies to disturb the chemicals in the body that respond to electromagnetic radiation over one womens googling. Especially when there are other diagnoses for this type of behavior that are clinically sound and have nothing to do with radio waves.
Jason, I grant you that the article does not reflect any double-blind study. I could not find another article I had read elsewhere where a reporter had tried some basic tests on her and she reacted to hidden electromagnetic fields and failed to react when the same devices were brought in inactivated. Still, my point was really to back up yours - that as far as I know there is scant to zero evidence to support the claims of this group.
YanıtlaSilI have read a more then a few articles about this topic, and it seems that the few that have qouted any medical studies, have said that any person that claims to be hyper sensitive to electro magnetic fields, are actually not. Al thought it would be a major inconvenience for many businesses that are public buildings, it would be a problem for these peoples neighbors who wish to use wireless home networking. How far would the city bend to these hypochondriacs wants
YanıtlaSilOk can we say INSANE!!!!! Seriously this is going way to damn far. When do we say enough is enough already. We have this great technology wireless communications and now all of a sudden after how many years of RF waves being present on planet earth there is a group of people that have a so called allergic reaction. I think they just want 5 mins of fame. Fame at the price of everyone finding out they are freaking crazy.
YanıtlaSilCould it be possible that the RF is doing nothing more than attracting more pollen and dust, thereby giving the impression that RF is responsible?
YanıtlaSilI never connected the two until now, but for the first time in my life several years ago, I broke out with severe allergies, having never had them before. It does also correspond to about the same time as I installed my first wireless wireless network at home, but I cant be sure.
It's also possible that I'm just an old fart and I was going to develop allergies at that point in my life regardless.
How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie roll tootsie pop? the world may never know....
I didn't read all of this but I'm going to comment on what you may not entirely understand about RF technology
YanıtlaSilwifi is iether in the 5.4 or 2.7 ghz rf spctrum
these are radio wave that exist weather there is wifi are not they are naturally occuring hypothetically the same radition pattern that tranfer porn movie could hypothetily happen naturally
the a wifi router send the signal in patterns intentionally in order to send actully data
these intentional or orginzed pattern structure could hypothitcall happen naturlly although i strongley doubt your going to be able to mod a router to pick up random signals that turn into magic web pages
the fcc has power output and range limitation in that you can not willing creat or alter device that violate those rules so thse people with allergic reactions should go to fiji where they are 5 mile out of any city if they still have problem its not wifi it naturally occuring healt scine anc industry band frequencey that occur natrually at best
really there probably tring to get a law suit it will not work ada does not apply it is unreasible to ask ever company and home owner in californai to not use wifi un do burden mean that the person who is providng accomdaitio has to spend more money then it cost to pay you
it doesnt apply a neibor who has wifi
if she moved next to me i point omi direction 5.7 ghz at her house all day
this is riddulus riddelon generation
solve our problems by blaming everyon else but our self
ive ranted enoug
К слову, лучший способ защитить кого-нибудь от назойливых телефонных звонков - купить Подавители мобильных телефонов
YanıtlaSil