Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Chromebooks in School and Your Child: Why the Rollout without Considering the Health Risk
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Maybe you'll be long gone if/when the cancer appears. |
Anonymous
|
The fact that kids are exposed to wireless all the time is excactly why you should be concerned about 6 hours a day.
Have you ever stopped to remember when we were not exposed all the time? a mere ten years ago.... we only had cell phones we used sparingly. Now the kids are inundated. It would be smart to ensure this stuff is safe. It woud be smart to think before we act. We do not get a return policy with the health of our child. you cannot roll back the clock. |
Anonymous
|
Schools is 6 plus hours a day
Plus the transmitters are directly over their heads and stronger than the home router because they manage 200 devices each. I turned the wireless off at home so I should have a choice for my child- I do not want he 6 hours a day. |
Anonymous
| RF radiation doesn't cause cancer, you stupid dolts |
Anonymous
|
Please remove the person name calling on this thread. The lack of civility speaks volumes.
Anyone who thinks thart Wireles in schools does noyt cause cancer should watch this video of Dr. Hardell speaking about wireless in schools. |
Anonymous
|
"Chromebooks in public schools emit radiation"?
Light bulbs emit radiation too. No lights in schools! Other things that emit radiation: radios, smoke detectors, bananas, people. |
Anonymous
 +1000 Let's go forward not backwards
|
Anonymous
|
Citing an individual study on potential health effects from RF transmissions is an inadequate basis for any decision. Studies of studies, or better still, aggregate studies of studies, is the way the measurement limitations, systematic errors, and technique biases are best dealt with. It is easy to find studies of studies from the past few years, as this topic has been the subject of a tremendous amount of research. We should start with this kind of data to make any judgement about possible action.
International Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection 2009 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19667809): "...it is the opinion of ICNIRP that the scientific literature published since the 1998 guidelines has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields” Scientific Committee for the Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks 2009 (http://ec.europa.eu/health/index_en.htm): "It is concluded from three independent lines of evidence (epidemiological, animal and in vitro studies) that exposure to RF fields is unlikely to lead to an increase in cancer in humans". "...the conclusion that scientific studies have failed to provide support for an effect of RF fields on self-reported symptoms still holds." World Health Organization 2013: "Studies to date provide no indication that environmental exposure to RF fields, such as from base stations, increases the risk of cancer or any other disease." US Food & Drug Administration 2012 (specifically about children): "While some researchers have reported biological changes associated with RF energy, these studies have failed to be replicated. The majority of studies published have failed to show an association between exposure to radiofrequency from a cell phone and health problems." And, from a study of studies of studies 2014 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4199025/): "The opinions of a total of ~35 expert groups and health authorities were published during the 2008–2014 and, the vast majority expressed the opinion that there was inadequate evidence for increased biological and health risks in humans exposed to RF fields emitted from wireless communication devices." People should read the actual research on this subject rather than picking a single study or single expert to rely on. The evidence does not support the conclusion that there is a danger. |
Anonymous
The bolded statement is false and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the technology. So-called "enterprise" wifi access points have beefier hardware, more robust software, and added features, but don't emit stronger signals. |
Anonymous
Hey! Someone posted some bullshit on the Internet! It MUST BE TRUE!!!! |
Anonymous
Time to homeschool. But be careful! I read a study that children who use butter churns are at risk of splinters. Personally, I buy pre-made butter so that I can reduce the risk of splinters to Larlo and Larletta. |
Anonymous
You have to love the use of Dr. Lennart Hardell in a video about wifi safety. He appears to be known for two things: (1) consistently proselytizing about the health effects of cell phone radiation and (2) running discredited medical studies that peer review has criticized as being methodologically flawed and statistically insignficant. He should pay more attention to what his own country (Sweden) put in the combined Nordic radiation safety authorities report: "The overall data published in the scientific literature to date do not show adverse health effects from exposure of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below the guidelines or limits adopted in the Nordic countries." |
Anonymous
I'm a researcher and I know that the butter churn splinter danger was fabricated by the margerine industry. Margerine is actually made of substance known as SOYLENT green which is people! Aliens have been visiting us, kidnapping people, making them into margarine, and attacking the butter industry. The profits from the margarine industry off set the costs of operating off world for the aliens. These aliens have branched off into wifi because the profit margin from margarine alone wasn't enough to sustain their efforts. The only solution is to churn your own butter and turn off all technology. Before you turn off your technology though, make sure to send a note to your PTA listerve collecting money for tin foil hats. Tin foil hats are the only way to shut down this alien invasion of margarine and wifi products. |
Anonymous
But where can I get tin foil? I can only find aluminum foil in the stores, and I don't want to use aluminum foil because aluminum causes Alzheimer's. |
Anonymous
|
Wow- The Industry is out today. Instead of thoughtfully addressing the issue you can only compare this to butter churning?
Try reading and educate yourself. "The electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today." - The U.S. Department of Interior in a 2014 Letter. http://nebula.wsimg.com/8d509848467b5874192eba1bef16e190?AccessKeyId=045114F8E0676B9465FB&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 |