Cell phone safety vs other wireless devices

There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
radiation they emit. Why aren't there similar concerns regarding other
wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs? Am I
justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
such safety concerns?

thanks

psomerson wrote:
> There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
> radiation they emit. Why aren't there similar concerns regarding other
> wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs? Am I
> justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
> such safety concerns?
>
> thanks

Well I haven't heard anyone talking about this for a long time now and
the last time it was brought up it was by a troll in newsgroup.

1. Do you hold a wireless LAN up to your head?

2. If you are so worried about the radiation from your cell or cordless
phone then get a portable hands free kit (wired) for it, then hold the
phone at arms length. This will not only keep the RF further away from
your body but will result in a lower power output from the phone because
it is clear of your body.

If you are still *paranoid* it is YOUR problem and nobody else's!



--
The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452
VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/
Domain Hosting http://www.GizNet.com/

On 24 Oct 2005 00:38:23 -0700, "psomerson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
>radiation they emit. Why aren't there similar concerns regarding other
>wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs?

Cordless phones and Wireless lans operate at very low power.

>Am I
>justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
>such safety concerns?

No.

>thanks

Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

In news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com "psomerson"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
> radiation they emit.

Not really.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN (E-Mail Removed)

psomerson wrote:
> There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
> radiation they emit. Why aren't there similar concerns regarding other
> wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs? Am I
> justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
> such safety concerns?
>
> thanks

What a great idea for class action suits against Starbucks, McDonalds, my
library and all other Wi-Fi APs.

On 24 Oct 2005 00:38:23 -0700, "psomerson" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
>radiation they emit. Why aren't there similar concerns regarding other
>wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs? Am I
>justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
>such safety concerns?
>
>thanks



this stuff is so crazy and so much 'hype' about the dangers of
cellphones and wireless that a little town south of me
"MENDOCINO" california ran the local WISP out of town when he started
installing radios, will not let cell towers be built within view of
the town, and tells people with cell phones to NOT BRING THEM TO TOWN
WITH THEM.

Mendocino even made 'wired magazine' over this BS

http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,49841,00.html

The local school district was going to the the WISP and they stopped
that, two teachers are out of 'medical leave' because they can not be
arround a television or computer monitor. what a place to be a 'tree
hugging teacher' on medical disability.

I guess you give the 'tree huggers' and inch and they will take all
they can get,

The one real funny thing is that if you take 'NETSTUMBLER" to town and
drive around you will see 30-40 access points running in an area of
about 2miles x 2 miles (and about 1/2 of them are open for anyone to
use on the internet because they are connected to DSL).. I guess what
"they' don't know won't hurt them, hehe


my $.02


Bob Smith
Robert Smith Consulting

"Wireless is my business"

On 24 Oct 2005 00:38:23 -0700, "psomerson" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>There is a lot of talk about the safety of cell phones, because of the
>radiation they emit. Why aren't there similar concerns regarding other
>wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs? Am I
>justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
>such safety concerns?
>
>thanks
Generally products that operate in 'unlicensed' terrirotory are
limited to 100 milliwatts output. That covers Wireless LAN, and
cordless phones. hand held Mobile phones operate in licensed
territory, and may put out up to 2 watts instantaneous power.

However the epidemilogical evidence of serious risk even at this level
is lacking. The military, and police have been using devices with even
higher output for decades, and the evidence that these devices are
contributing to an early death is sorely lacking. So while they may
indeed be a risk, almost be definition, it must be buried in the
'noise'

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:42:10 -0700, matt weber <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Generally products that operate in 'unlicensed' terrirotory are
>limited to 100 milliwatts output.

Most 2.4Ghz mesh network radios operate at 1 watt into a 6dBi omni
antenna which is the maximum legal for FCC 15.247.

>That covers Wireless LAN, and
>cordless phones.

Cordless phones also vary. Engenius SN-920 900MHz phones xmit about
0.9 watts.
http://www.futurecomtech.com/engenius_sn-920_faq.htm

>hand held Mobile phones operate in licensed
>territory, and may put out up to 2 watts instantaneous power.

Cellular handsets are limited to 0.6 watts. Mobiles can go to 3
watts. All of the handsets have automatic power control to limit the
tx power to only as much as necessary. The tiny new phones barely
transmit at more than 0.1 watt.

http://www.mapcruzin.com/rfr_maps/index.html

>However the epidemilogical evidence of serious risk even at this level
>is lacking.

The risk is not in the health issues, but in the legal exposure.

>The military, and police have been using devices with even
>higher output for decades, and the evidence that these devices are
>contributing to an early death is sorely lacking.

One might argue that the use of radio by law enforcement might explain
their general lack of sanity, but no research has been done on this
connection.

>So while they may
>indeed be a risk, almost be definition, it must be buried in the
>'noise'

The current adage is "if it saves one life..." and such. Statistically
insignificant health risks have been regulated off the market and will
probably continue to be regulated as long as victims can be
manufactured. When something goes wrong, a culprit must be found.
Eventually, the legal machinery will realize that EVERYTHING we do is
potentially unsafe and cannot be protected by legal action.
--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

> wireless devices, e.g. cordless phones and wireless LANs? Am I
> justified to hesitate to install a wireless LAN in my home because of
> such safety concerns?

Only if you place the AP on the floor and trip over it.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.gsm - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:25:11
-0700, Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:42:10 -0700, matt weber <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:

>>The military, and police have been using devices with even
>>higher output for decades, and the evidence that these devices are
>>contributing to an early death is sorely lacking.
>
>One might argue that the use of radio by law enforcement might explain
>their general lack of sanity, but no research has been done on this
>connection.

ROTFLMAO!

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>