Comments on: Dangers of Wi-Fi Should be Reevaluated, Possibly More Harmful Than Previosuly Indicated

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:49:08 +0000

Rod want his cake and to eat it. He dismisses perfectly sound science as pseudoscientific and yet wants us to believe that Wi-Fo signals magically have no dose-response relationship. Can you think of any stimulus that causes harm to humans that does not have a dose-response effect? Rod appears to believe that because no dose-response relationship has been found then low doses must be harmful, rather than the rational response which is their is no effect. I guess this is because Rod has already made his mind up.

PS Dr Carlo has some pretty strange ideas about all of this. He is a a voice of one.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 22:33:55 +0000

yeah whatever

By: Owen Boswarva

Owen Boswarva — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:03:33 +0000

I have recently started a website (http://www.wifirisks.com/) about wireless networks and whether they present risks to human health. I have not yet formed a settled opinion myself, and with vested interests on both sides of the debate I think we should all maintain a degree of scepticism.

However, it does seem that an increasing number of people are attributing symptoms (rightly or wrongly) to wi-fi and other EMF sources. The science in the Panorama report may have been presented badly, but that in itself underlines the need for more rigorous research in this area.

By: Rod Read

Rod Read — Tue, 22 May 2007 09:25:32 +0000

Those who knowlegeably and pseudo-scientifically spout the inverse square law completely miss the point that biological responses from body tissue like protein receptors on cell membranes are not interfered with by power levels at all, they are irrelevant, there is no threshold known. Dose/response has never been established, not even the parameters, whether it is linear or whatever.
Cells respond to the signal, the informational component. They perceive it as a toxic threat, shut down and sometimes die, necrosis.
Communications are disrupted, the immune system is compromised. I am not making this up, Dr Carlo said he has clinical evidence for this at his House of Commons presentation. He is training doctors.
There are whole organ and other effects too.

By: Martin Weatherall

Martin Weatherall — Tue, 22 May 2007 02:22:16 +0000

What Mathew needs to realize is that school childen do not sit at their desk, a few feet from a cell phone mast. They do sit with a few feet of WiFi devices that subject them to a constant high source of radiation.
Much scientific research has shown that the microwave radiation produced by WiFi, cell phones and broadcasting antennas, causes DNA damage, changes to cell structure and changes to the composition of blood.
Mathew should try to produce one scientific paper that shows that microwave radiation is safe. It does not exist!

By: mathew

mathew — Mon, 21 May 2007 22:38:36 +0000

Please read about the inverse square law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law

Wi-fi signals are not more powerful than cellphone signals. Since the cellphone signals were measured at 100x the distance, they were automatically attenuated by a factor of 100×100 = 10,000.

i.e. the report is scaremongering crap.