Live data from Hacker News

Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

11–20 of 78 posts

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#11

"Wi-Fi" covers at least two different frequencies - is the effect observable at both?

From clicking through to Journal Full Abstract of the study they only looked at 2.4Ghz and not 5.0Ghz. This is a better link for the content: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393511...

I don't know enough about wave transmissions to know if higher frequency would be more or less likely to cause issues, anyone?

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#14
post #4
post #2

I'm still going to use it, though. Is there even any alternative at all?

ethernet?

Most laptops today don't even come with an Ethernet port, let alone cell phones, which are virtually ubiquitous.

The last purchase made in my family of an Ethernet-enabled system was running Windows XP.

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#15
post #4
post #2

I'm still going to use it, though. Is there even any alternative at all?

ethernet?

Let's assume I turn off all the WiFi devices in my house and only hard wire things. I can still see at least 7 WiFi networks from my neighbor's houses. Not to mention public spaces. I don't really think there is any way to avoid WiFi in most modern nations.

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#16
A related study by apparently the same author makes the following claim: "microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action"

If that is true, then it is quite significant.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879308

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#18
I find this paper rather flawed (article link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393511... ).

I don't claim to be an expert on EMF effects on the human body, but I interpret his core claim to be that because the seven effect studies he cites had insufficient power to determine there was no correlation, there must be correlation because "similar" EMF studies did show a response, and therefore the effects should be considered established (ergo the fairly clickbait title). I use quotes for similar because it doesn't seem they were all that similar, which is why he objects to the studies he references.

If he had simply restricted himself to saying that more research was required because previous studies were inadequate (due to small sample size, methodological issues, etc.), I think this would have been a lot more defensible. Right now it reads like tinfoil hat time.

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#19
it's important to note that the nih.gov domain doesn't mean this is endorsed in any way by the NIH. (In case you were very shocked, like I was.)

It's just a link to PubMed, which is an aggregator of journal articles hosted by the NIH's National Library of Medicine.

Nearly any life sciences article published in any kind of journal, good or bad, would end up with an abstract on here. Evaluate it on its own merits.

Re: Wi-fi is an important threat to human health

#20
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I'd like to agree, it's not, as many devices - think smartphones and tablet - doesn't come with ethernet ports; neither do macs any more. I have some of my home devices wired: tv, console, home server; but for laptops and smartphones, it gets tricky. It also wouldn't help getting rid of the neighbour's wifi, unless I get some sort of faraday-cage insulation.

Could it be possible to have so NFC like inductive coupling for Gbit ETH ?

No; not enough bandwidth.
Post reply on HN