An article in Salon reports that exposure to wi-Fi devices may be carcinogenic, especially got children.
It says:
“A new article published in the Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure called “Why children absorb more microwave radiation than adults: The consequences” analyzed previously published peer-reviewed studies on RF/EMF and found that not only are children much more susceptible to certain kinds of radiation, but that our current exposure limits may be inadequate.
“Forbes’ Robert J. Szczerba reports:
Children and fetuses absorb more microwave radiation, according to the authors, because their bodies are relatively smaller, their skulls are thinner, and their brain tissue is more absorbent.
“More generally, the studies cited in the paper found RF/EMF exposure is linked to cancers of the brain and salivary glands, ADHD, low sperm count, and, among girls who keep cell phones in their bra, breast cancer. They also noted that the average time between exposure to a carcinogen and a resultant tumor is three or more decades.”
Another analysis cited in the article is less alarming:
“Another study was recently launched jointly by Imperial College and the University of London to collect information about the effect of Wi-Fi and mobile technology on children’s brains. “Scientific evidence available to date is reassuring and shows no association between exposure to radiofrequency waves from mobile phone use and brain cancer in adults in the short term,” said Professor Paul Elliot, director of Medical Research Council Centre for Environment and Health at Imperial College. “But the evidence available regarding long term heavy use and children’s use is limited and less clear.”
Now that most testing will be online, the term “toxic testing” takes on a new, more sinister meaning.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
So perhaps government plans to increase municipal access to wi-fi is just an extension of the Communist plans to fluoridate our water?
You’re not paranoid if they’re really out to get you.
LikeLike
To judge the true cost of testing, I think we need to add up all the costs. This is the Ohio Math and English Test Preparation Check List- the CC testing. There’s another checklist too, for social studies and science (the state tests).
I don’t know how many adult work hours this represents, but it is costing schools much, much more than the “ten hours” of student work time that is constantly quoted. We should get the total time/labor cost for each public school, not the phony “ten hours” number. I assume if all these school employees weren’t preparing for testing they’d be doing something else, right?
http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Ohio-s-New-Learning-Standards/News/Test-Preparation-Checklist/2015-Math-and-ELA-Testing-Checklist_011415.pdf.aspx
LikeLike
Not this nonsense please….the tinfoil notion that radiowaves are dangerous has long been conclusively put to bed. Since radiowaves are theoretically incapable of causing the things they are accused of such as cancer and brain damage, all studies about this matter have been looking at “unknown unknowns” – and have found nothing.
LikeLike
Perhaps . . . and while not exactly directed to Wi-Fi systems . . .
SCIENCE NEWS
BODY & BRAIN
Cell phones may affect brain metabolism
Activity rises near phones pressed to ears, study finds
BY LAURA SANDERS 7:12PM, FEBRUARY 22, 2011
Magazine issue: Vol. 179 #7, March 26, 2011
Power-talkers with cell phones glued to their ears may be getting more than conversation. A 50-minute call boosts activity in brain regions near the ear where a phone is located, a brain-scanning study published February 22 in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows.
“This is the first paper that really shows there are changes in the brain,” says bioengineer Henry Lai of the University of Washington in Seattle, who coauthored an editorial published in the same issue of JAMA. Talking on a cell phone pressed to the ear, he says, “is not really safe.”
In the study, researchers measured the brain activity of 47 participants who had pairs of Samsung cell phones strapped to their heads, one on each side. The phone on the left ear was turned off, while the one on the right received a 50-minute recorded message. This phone was kept muted so that the subject didn’t know which phone was on, and also to prevent stimulation of the brain’s hearing center.
A few minutes after the call, a PET scan revealed that brain regions next to the working phone had higher levels of glucose metabolism. The left side of the brain and other areas, even those quite close to the phone, showed no changes. Since active brain cells require glucose, the increase suggests that cell phone radiation is boosting brain activity. “The human brain is sensitive to the electromagnetic radiation that is emitted from cell phones,” says study coauthor Nora Volkow of the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Md.
The particular brain regions affected would probably change depending on a phone’s design and how a person held it, Volkow says. On the phones used in the study the antennas are near the bottom, so the brain areas involved were the orbitofrontal region, which sits right behind the eyes, and the temporal pole below it.
Glucose metabolism rose in these areas by about 7 percent — an increase typically seen when brain regions become active. For instance, glucose metabolism in the language centers of the brain rises by about 10 percent when a person is talking, Volkow says.
The increase in brain metabolism observed in the experiment may be an underestimate, because cell phones emit more radiation when a person is talking, Lai says. Radiation levels also change depending on the phone type, the distance to the nearest cell phone tower and the number of people using phones in the same area. These variables have prevented scientists from getting good epidemiological evidence about potential health risks of cell phone usage.
Researchers don’t yet know whether cell phone radiation is dangerous. “At this point we do not know what the clinical significance of this particular finding is,” Volkow says. The heightened activity may not have any ill effects, or it may be dangerous, particularly with years of heavy cell phone use or in the developing brains of children and teens.
“In my case, I don’t like my brain to be stimulated by anything that is not physiological,” Volkow says. “There are very easy solutions that don’t cost anything for those who want to play it safe.” For instance, people can limit their time on the phone, use the speakerphone option, or talk with a hands-free device that’s connected to the phone with a wire.
CELLULAR ACTIVITY After a 50-minute call to a cell phone on a subject’s right side, nearby brain regions showed heightened activity. In a brain with phones placed to both sides of the head but turned off, activity was normal.
CELLULAR ACTIVITY After a 50-minute call to a cell phone on a subject’s right side, nearby brain regions showed heightened activity. In a brain with phones placed to both sides of the head but turned off, activity was normal.
JAMA, FEB. 23, 2011, VOL. 305, P. 808 © 2011 AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSN.
Citations
N. Volkow et al. Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism. Journal of the American Medical Association. Vol. 305, February 23, 2011.
LikeLike
Wish it was nonsense, d paradise…..however their are many medical journal articles regarding radiation causing skin cancers. My own reconstructive surgeon just spoke to me about this last November when he removed cancer from the tip of my nose, and it was so extensive that it required skin grafting. This was my 25 such surgery, 14 th on my face. My lifetime radiation count is very high from various exposures. The doctor believes this was more damaging than the California sun…I am a vintage board surfer and had endless sun exposure.
LikeLike
Can’t believe that you didn’t read the comments section attached to the article you quote from Salon. The article is fundamentally discredited and undermined as just poor journalism and as scaremongering. Can’t believe that Diane Ravitch didn’t do her own research before circulating such an article.
LikeLike
Careful Diane, you’re starting to get into “loony left” territory with this one, which will undermine the credibility of all your other extremely valid and thoughtful posts. Nobody really cares what Forbes or Salon have to say about science, certainly nobody who knows science. Please wait until results are in and there’s definitive proof one way or another before you start using partial or pseudo science. Your other arguments against standardized testing are far more valid and proven.
LikeLike
You folks are quick to judge this article and call it loony, however, suggest you search the medical journals on this topic. The plethora of exotic brain cancers in young children has been a red flag for various Children’s Hospitals in LA and nationwide.
In 2002 the LAUSD BoE decided against WiFi for the portent of cancers in children in K – 4. It is only recently with the rush to techonolgic tools mainly in order to take CC exams that WiFi once again is in vogue.
LikeLike
Even if people want to discredit an article, it is a good thing that the article provokes intelligent questions. We should never quit asking and looking and questioning.
So here is a question that just popped into my “loony left” brain. Since we know, irrefutably that autism is skyrocketing, and we know irrefutably that the use of wi-fi is recent and pervasive, is there a connection? Especially, is there a connection with autism and the mother’s use of devices that involve radio waves of any sort?
LikeLike
You raise a good question, Kris. But to answer it, we would have to control for all the other things that are increasing. Like temperature, greenhouse gases, population.whatever.
LikeLike
Very true. And the answer to the autism puzzle probably lies in a combination of factors.
LikeLike
The prevailing theory on the exponential explosing of autism is more based on what mother and child ingested and inhaled. Again can be found in medical literature.
LikeLike
explosion, that is, of autism…
LikeLike
It has caused enough concern for Denmark and one Canadian province to remove it completely
from elementary public schools. (I’ll try to post a link)
LikeLike
Perhaps this will do:
https/www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrVNdbT7hb4
https/www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v75sKAUFdc&list=PLC9EAF839
LikeLike
There is still much unknown, but I won’t disregard entirely the Salon article.
LikeLike
When I saw that some readers considered this article to be “loony left” and “tinfoil hat” (I think that means loony right, I almost removed it from the site. Truthfully, I don’t know the answer to the question of whether longterm exposure to wi-fi has harmful effects. Maybe it does, maybe not. I went scouring the Internet, and found a variety of articles from what appeared to be responsible sources, and they had different views. This is a post that is provocative. It may be dead wrong. It may not be. I don’t know enough to settle it, but it appears that no one else does either.
LikeLike
My knowledge of this subject is quite limited, but my education as a scientist leads me to leave room for doubt. This is not a question of jumping off the top of a 10 story building and wondering what will happen. “Theory” can’t answer this question. It can only be answered by experiment.
And I’m pretty sure that the question will not be answered by
“Squelching Doubt”
“Loony left” and “tinfoil hat”
A way to diss discussion
Fact bereft, imagine that
The logic of percussion
//////////////////////////
Here’s what Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman said about doubt:
“The scientist has a lot of experience with ignorance and doubt and uncertainty, and this experience is of very great importance, I think. When a scientist doesn’t know the answer to a problem, he is ignorant. When he has a hunch as to what the result is, he is uncertain. And when he is pretty darn sure of what the result is going to be, he is still in some doubt. We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty — some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain.”
Now, we scientists are used to this, and we take it for granted that it is perfectly consistent to be unsure, that it is possible to live and not know. But I don’t know whether everyone realizes this is true. Our freedom to doubt was born out of a struggle against authority in the early days of science. It was a very deep and strong struggle: permit us to question — to doubt — to not be sure. I think that it is important that we do not forget this struggle and thus perhaps lose what we have gained.”
LikeLike
In this case, the “experiment” is actually being carried out on a massive scale. Stay tuned for the results.
LikeLike
See what you think after you watch this….Resonance Beings of Frequency
LikeLike
I have been studying this issue for six years and know more than 150 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the effects of electromagnetic fields who believe we have sufficient evidence to warrant the adoption of precautionary measures including stronger regulatory limits. I have some resources on Wi-Fi on my Electromagnetic Radiation Safety web site at http://www.saferemr.com/2013/03/opposition-to-los-angeles-public.html .
LikeLike
“VAMmania” (Thanks to KrazyTA for the title)
It might be microwaves
Or have some other cause
Reformers sure seem dazed
Which gives us cause for pause
LikeLike
I’ve spent the last six years studying the research. There is substantial reason to be concerned about the health risks from exposure to Wi-Fi and other sources of wireless radiation including cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors, smart meters and cell towers. For more information see my Electromagnetic Radiation Safety web site at http://saferemr.com. There are several articles on Wi-Fi. Just search on this term on my web site.
LikeLike
Thanks Joel for being a voice of reason, and citations. Everyone here should read your link.
LikeLike
Dr. Martin M Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences suggests a possible
link to autism in his presentation to Portland, Oregon Public School Board.
http://www.wifiinschools.com
LikeLike