аЯрЁБс>ўџ FHўџџџEџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС7 №П’?bjbjUU &R7|7|’;џџџџџџlЌЌЌЌЌЌЌРl l l l x ,РC"А А А А А А А А ТФФФФФФ$e …bшЌА А А А А шЌЌА А §А кЌА ЌА ТА ТЊТЌЌТА Є Р.ŽkДЦРЌ l ŠŽТТ0CТччТРРЌЌЌЌйhttp://www.macopinion.com/columns/roadwarrior/06/06/06/index.html Laptop Computers And The EMF Hazard Revisited 06 June 2006 by Charles Moore Contributing Columnist print format | email this story | talk  In this week's The Road Warrior Mailbag, I posted a letter from a reader in Sweden named Camilla, who outlined her nightmarish travails and tribulations with a severe case of electromagnetic hypersensitivity, which is placing significant constraints on her lifestyle and ability to work. You can read the letter and my reply here: http://www.macopinion.com/columns/roadwarrior/06/05/30/index.html This is an issue that is becoming a more common concern, not coincidentally I think with the increasing proliferation of cellphone coverage and wireless devices in our environment, from wireless phones and cellphones, to wireless computer networks and even the prosaic RFIDs in store merchandise. Many would like to imagine that the phenomenon of electromagentic hypersensitivity, and the increasingly suspected relationship of environmental Electromagnetic Field (EMF) exposure to illness is, well, imaginary. I don't believe that it is, and I've long been a skeptic about the safety of wireless devices, although I hasten to emphasize that wireless technology is only one facet of the larger issue of electromagnetic pollution in our increasingly electro-polluted culture. One theory is that because both the electromagnetic pulse of the Earth and the human alpha brain wave both hover around a frequency of eight hertz, continuous exposure to strong fields at other frequencies (for instance, wall current in North America is 60 hertz) may disrupt the human body's electrobiochemical rhythms. Environmental levels of background radio frequency and microwave background radiation have risen by factors of thousands for the general population since the Second World War - and according to EPA estimates are increasing at about 15% per year, including radio waves from radio and TV towers, microwaves from cell phones, cell sites, mobile phones, cordless phones, computer LANs and microwave ovens. Health concerns associated with EMF exposure are not limited to dread diseases like leukemia and other cancers. CTV News recently reported that electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is regarded by the World Health Organization (WHO as a real health problem, with reported symptoms - ranging from mild to severe that include chronic fatigue, depression, body aches, memory loss and sleep disruption. The report cites Swedish and British statistics that say about two or three per cent of the population suffers from EHS, while some claims estimate 10 to 25 per cent of national populations may be affected by at least mild symptoms. This is all very unsettling, especially when one hears of stories like Camilla's. It also is something we're going to be hearing more of. Another reader, who did not want to be identified, commented last week that "As a school psychologist, I have seen kids sit with their chins on an Airport-supported iBook while doing their work, and the farsighted will get very close to the screens (not to mention the head of the child on the other side of the screen." I am apprehensive that the computer/wireless revolution in education may result in ugly consequences down the road, and at least some educators share my concerns. A 2004 paper by Dr. Magda Havas, B.Sc. Ph.D. Associate Professor, Environmental & Resource Studies, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, entitled Elecrtromagnetic Fields & Cancers: Children at risk with residential and school exposures to EMFs", says that: "We now have more than 20 years of scientific research from around the world showing adverse health effects associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields from our use of electricity. Both children and adults are affected although children appear to be more sensitive.... There is a consistent 2-to-4-fold risk of children developing leukemia when they are exposed to magnetic fields exceeding 2 to 4 mG in their homes.... Studies of occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields report an increased incidence of adult leukemia, brain tumors, and breast cancer at levels above 2 mG.... These studies in combination with laboratory studies lend credence to the concept that extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields are harmful to human health at levels to which we are currently exposed to in the home, at school, and in the workplace." Prof. Havas is conducting primary research into the health effects of exposure to low-intensity electromagnetic fields, and has published numerous papers on this subject and served as an expert witness in Canada on several permitting proceedings for powerlines and antenna base stations. She has been trying to encourage school boards to measure magnetic fields within their schools as part of their health and safety programs. She provides information to people who are concerned about antennas, power lines or transformers being built near their residence. You can find out more about Prof. Havas's work here: http://www.trentu.ca/academic/ihs/mhavas.html In February, itbusiness.ca reported that Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada, has banned wireless Internet access on campus until university president Fred Gilbert is satisfied that EMF exposure doesn't pose a health risk, particularly to young people. Gilbert told ITBusiness.ca that he based his decision on scientific literature that indicates the potential for "some fairly significant" health consequences, citing studies done by scientists for the California Public Utilities Commission, whose findings boil down to the fact that while there is no proven link between EMFs exposure and diseases such as leukemia and brain tumours, the possible risk warrants further investigation. For the full report visit here. http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=38093&PageMem=1 I first researched and wrote about these issues back in 1999, for a column that appeared here in The Road Warrior, and which still generates an amazing amount of reader mail. It's a topic about which, even nearly seven years later, it is difficult to find authoritative information. There is still no really conclusive evidence either condemning electronic frequency emissions from cellphones and other wireless communication and networking devices as a health risk, but neither have they received a convincingly clean bill of health. Some research, like that of Prof. Havas, is being done, but it remains outside the mainstream, I think to a large extent because the "mainstream" would prefer not to address the issue. Consequently, I'm inclined to take rote assurances of wireless safety from industry and government regulatory sources with a large grain of salt. I want to see the research data and the methodology behind it on which such assurances are based. Earlier this year, Reuters reported that a new study by the Swedish National Institute for Working Life (electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a recognized disorder in Sweden) looked at mobile phone use of 2,200 cancer patients and an equal number of healthy control cases, and found that use of mobile phones over a long period of time can raise the risk of brain tumors. Published in the International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, the study defines heavy cellphone use as 2,000 plus hours, which "corresponds to 10 years' use in the work place for one hour per day," and tracked a significantly higher risk of tumor on the side of the head where the cellphone was generally used - in heavy users of mobile phones, a 240 percent increased risk of a malignant tumor on the "phone side" of the head. For the full report click here. At my house we do have one wireless telephone, but the other three are wired, and we don't have any cellphones, partly because of health risk concerns, but also because there is only sporadic and undependable cellphone service available in the remote rural area where we're located, which in some respects is a blessing, since powerful EMF radiation from cellphone towers is not a local worry. I also have been a serious foot-dragger about joining the wireless computer revolution. The 17" PowerBook I purchased in February is the first computer I've owned equipped with either Airport or Bluetooth, and I keep both turned off unless I need them up and running to test a product for review. Again, this is no particular hardship in a practical sense, since there is no WiFi Internet access within 50 miles from here, and I'm quite satisfied with wired input devices and wired Ethernet for in-house LAN purposes. On the other hand, if WiFi were available here, I'm not saying that I categorically would refuse to use it, although I remain cautiously skeptical. After reading Camilla's story, reader Marc Brandeis wrote last week: Hello Charles, You recently published a "Mailbag" letter from a reader who had extreme sensitivity to electro-magnetic fields, including cell phones and wireless computing signals, all of which you likened to your own chemical sensitivities. I have a question along the same lines, but more specific. Back in the days when desktop computers and tube-type monitors were the norm, we had a considerable amount of press coverage about EM fields, keeping a safe distance from the monitor, and so on. I have never understood: what is the EM situation with laptops, i.e., the computer itself as opposed to its wireless communication features? Does a flat pixel-based screen put out any substantial EM field which would raise issues of health effects? When we do laptop computer work - with our hands resting on the case and keyboard of a laptop, directly above wiring and circuit boards - are our hands "immersed" in an electromagnetic field? Or do laptops have internal shielding or other measures to prevent this? (I have often wondered if my hands are being "zapped" all the time I work on my laptop, and whether for this reason alone it would be wise to buy a separate keyboard.) In case the answer to these questions would vary according to the particular computer model, I myself am still using a WallStreet G3 but contemplating the purchase of a MacBook or MacBook Pro. Thanks for all your informative and well-written columns. Marc Well, Marc, like I said, this is not a well-documented field, so to speak. In broad strokes, laptop computers, with their LCD screens, external power supplies, and economical usage of current, definitely generate less EMF than most desktop machines, especially ones with CRT monitors. According to Natural Resources Canada: "The most energy-efficient computer/monitor combination is a laptop unit. Laptops use a maximum of 15 watts (compared with 80 to 160 watts for desktop PCs) and automatically power down (go into sleep mode) after several minutes of inactivity." That "maximum of 15 watts" is a bit out of date (alas, could be as high as 45 watts these days), but laptops do still use substantially less current than your typical desktop ( a Mac mini with a LCD display might be an exception), and newer, more powerful desktop models with CRT displays can hit 250 watts or more. For example, by one set of measurements, an iMac G5 with 20" LCD drew 97 watts when up and running but doing nothing, and 110-120 watts while executing tasks. There would be some EMF emission from a laptop's hard drive and other electronic internals, but my provisional deduction is that it isn't something we have to worry overmuch about in the greater scheme of things. The fact that Camilla is still able to use her PowerBook, at least with Airport and Bluetooth turned off, indicates that laptops are relatively benign EMF emitters. Of course using an external keyboard would lessen exposure even more. Radiation from computers drops off dramatically with distance. Move back 2 feet from your normal work position and you can cut your exposure by 75%. Move back 4 feet and it diminishes by nearly 90%. I would also suspect that metal-skinned PowerBooks and MacBook Pros would expose users less than plastic-bodied machines. I've gone through my home with a gaussmeter, and gotten negligible readings from my laptops, with desktop CRTs and TVs giving off a lot more, especially at the back and sides. It's the wireless features you want to watch out for. I didn't have a wireless-equipped computer when the gaussmeter was here, but it stands to reason that laptop wireless cards have to emit substantial radio frequency (RF) signals in order to be able to communicate with the base station, and RF penetrates brick walls. IIf you'd like to check out your own setup, Sonic Technology offers an inexpensive EMF detector, the ES9000 Electrosensor Electromagnetic Field Detector, available at Amazon.com for $21.09 The manufacturer's blurb notes that: "Sonic Technology Experts agree that prolonged exposure to ElectroMagnetic Fields (EMFs) from power lines, household wiring and electrical appliances may be detrimental to health. The ElectroSensor is a simple, yet effective Gaussmeter that measures these potentially harmful radiation waves. The push of a button displays EMF levels from 1.3 to 30 milliGauss on an easy to read L.E.D. light bar scale, allowing you to determine the source and strength of EMF emissions and exercise prudent avoidance. Operates on one AAA alkaline battery (included) and is accurate to + or - 3dB. One year warranty." For more information, click here. There are also a variety of EMF shields available for computer users. You can find out more about that at this site: http://www.lessemf.com/computer.html More information on EMF health risks and coping strategies can be found at: http://www.healthandenvironment.org http://www.EMRpolicy.org http://www.EMRnetwork.org http://www.emfacts.com http://www.emfbioeffects.org http://www.microwavenews.com http://www.energyfields.org http://www.wave-guide.org http://www.feb.se http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc28/sc4/SC-4%20Minutes-June%202002.pdf http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/embs/comar/rf_mw.htm More useful links: By Kevin Byrne and Dave Stetzer of Stetzer Electric ask: "Could Dirty Electricity be making you and your Family Sick?," and offer these computer-related tips: • When replacing your computer monitor or TV, buy a new LCD, they emit much less EM radiation. • If possible, use a laptop PC on battery power and plug it in to charge when you are gone or take a break. For more information, visit: http://www.dirtyelectricity.ca/tips.htm A U.S. Food and Drug Administration Web site addresses the issue to some degree, although is focused on mainly cellphones: http://www.fda.gov/cellphones Information on biological effects from exposure to non-thermal levels of radiofrequency radiation is linked at: http://www.emrnetwork.org/news/news.htm Going to http://www.ieee.org and searching on "rf radiation hazard" will produce a list of references. http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc28/AUT29-F.pdf (master citation list, as on 8 January 2003, in use by the subgroup SC-4 of the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety) *** Charles W. Moore Bop€ІВЕХШЬ\Ш+эџFF"g"з&|,в8ѓ8m9‘9т9:::!:::<:R:T:p:r:Ž::Ћ:­:Ц:Ш:й:л:";$;P;ј< =ž=М=/>W>c>v>У>ѓ>~?Ž?‘?’?єчєогоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоСоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪоЪИB*OJQJph33fB* OJQJph3™B*OJQJph3fЬ5B*OJQJph3fЬB*OJQJph5B*CJ0OJQJphB*CJ OJQJph?Bp}ŽІЭЮ^_g h Њ Ћ > ?  )*ˆ‰юопH§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§’?§HIE"F"g"h"ѓ#є#&&ж&з&ч&ш&((Ь(Э(x+y+;,<,w,x,},~,§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§~,œ--Й.К.–0—03 3›3œ3M4N45‘5O6P6v6w6б8в8ѕ8і8l9m9“9”9с9т9:§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§:!:<:T:r::­:Ш:л:$;R;S;T;U;V;j;k; < <l<m<к<л<љ<"=#=Ÿ=О=П=0>§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§0>Y>Z>Т>У>x?y?~??‘?’?§§§§§§§§§§ $€А‚. АЦA!Аќ"АS#7$Х%А Ф i<@ёџ< NormalCJOJQJ_HmH sH tH <A@ђџЁ< Default Paragraph Font’;RџџџџBp}ŽІЭЮ^_ghЊЋ>? * ˆ‰юопHIEFghѓє""ж"з"ч"ш"$$Ь$Э$x'y';(<(w(x(}(~(œ))Й*К*–,—,/ /›/œ/M0N01‘1O2P2v2w2б4в4ѕ4і4l5m5“5”5с5т56!6<6T6r66­6Ш6л6$7R7S7T7U7V7j7k7 8 8l8m8к8л8љ8"9#9Ÿ9О9П90:Y:Z:Т:У:x;y;~;;‘;”;˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜0€€˜€€˜€€˜0€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜0€€˜0€€š€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€š0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€š0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€˜€€’?"H~,:0>’?#%&'(’?$ис-7lqКЩ–Ÿ“›щ ю > C D I Ш и %)‰‘ЬЮDLTZ€‚”ƒксGOlp—Чႇ|‚юї‰ŽБК"Ьж9BЫдЗ Р k!o!""ƒ"Œ"Л"У"№'њ'"()(-(4(",&,Р-Щ-W/^/Н/Ч/И0Т0‘1”1Ж1Л1§1 2В2С2Ъ2Ю2/3<3X3b3д3о3V7Z7ƒ7Š7Ž7•7’9œ9::‰:‹:”;}ІЋIKпў36Fe”%Ÿ%i+l+V7i7п7с788”;3333333333џџmpurdyCsystem drive only:Desktop Folder:MAST MADNESS:WLAN Moore Jun 06.doc Peter Mobley8C:\Backup\DVD2\WART\WORD\WiFi Docs\WLAN Moore Jun 06.doc Peter Mobley3C:\Backup\DVD2\WART\WiFi Docs\WLAN Moore Jun 06.docџ@€V7V7dKїV7S7’;`@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡z €џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡z €џArial3‡z €џTimes7& ‡ ŸVerdana qˆ№аh єЇуљЇ&1hY№ЅРДД€20dQ<2ƒq№џџ http://wwwmpurdy Peter Mobleyўџр…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0`ˆЄАРЬм є  ( 4@HPXф http://wwwttpmpurdywpurNormalw Peter Mobleyo3teMicrosoft Word 9.0@Œ†G@NъГЦ@‚_rkДЦ1ўџеЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0ј hp€ˆ˜  ЈАИ Р зфhomewhQ<   http://www Title  !"#$%&'()ўџџџ+,-./01234ўџџџ6789:;<ўџџџ>?@ABCDўџџџ§џџџGўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РFрЯŽkДЦI€1Tableџџџџџџџџџџџџ*чWordDocumentџџџџџџџџ&RSummaryInformation(џџџџ5DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџџџџџ=CompObjџџџџjObjectPoolџџџџџџџџџџџџрЯŽkДЦрЯŽkДЦџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq