Chromebooks in School and Your Child: Why the Rollout without Considering the Health Risk

[Anonymous]

People resort to name calling when they are at a loss to respond a more thoughtful way. I recommend keeping the conversation respectful please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry. these access points handle 200 devices. Your home router does not. In a school there are dozens of these in every other room or so.
In your home it might be in the basement.
[/img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qtcOnJHqaYw/VkI6dKWAYMI/AAAAAAAAAzs/ssYDrHgWEaE/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2015-11-10%2Bat%2B1.40.09%2BPM.png[img]?

Kids are getting exposed to high doses ALL DAY LONG

You are simply spewing false information. The number of devices handled has no relationship to the amount of RF emitted by the router. That was demonstrated in the earlier post. There are not "dozens" of routers in every other room. There are probably not even dozens in an entire school. You cannot expect people to believe this type of garbage. When you post information like this that is so blatantly false, you undermine your entire argument. If you can't get basic facts like this correct, why should we expect that anything else you have to say is accurate?

oh dear. You are 100 Wrong. There are dozens in every school. And there are access points (microwave transmitters) in every other room in some schools in Montgomery County. I suggest you go in yourself and take a look at the access point maps.

It is you who need your facts straight before you state false information being that you did not even check into it.
we checked.
we got the info.
its NOT GOOD

You wrote that "there are dozens of these in every other room". Now, you are talking about dozens in every school, which is doubtful. Maybe some schools have dozens, but not all. Either way, your original statement about dozens in every other room was wrong. You should at least acknowledge that instead of simply ranting.

[Anonymous]

Sorry but it is you who misunderstood what I was trying to say.
perhaps it was not clear. Of course there are not dozens in every room! there are dozens, pause- in every other other room... But that is besides the point.
I think you know my point.

The point is there are dozens in a school-

[Anonymous]

For the 1000th time you can't take wifi and cell phones and equate them to each other, this was discussed at length in the other thread.

You have to be specific when you are dealing with matters of science, and yes you did write a dozen.

[Anonymous]

You are misinformed.

Cell phones and wireless emit radio frequency radiation. Same type- slightly different frequency. Educate yourself please.

It is all radio frequency. Please watch this. tell me your thoughts.

[Anonymous]

Read this please Non-thermal effects and mechanisms of interaction between electromagnetic fields and living matter. This paper, written by the world’s top experts in brain modeling and microwave radiation exposure to the brain (several of whom have worked for industry), shows that on average a child’s brain will absorb about twice as much microwave radiation from a cell phone as does an adult. Yet, all cell phones today are tested in terms of a very large adult male—who only represents the body sizes of 3% of all U.S. men.

http://www.saferphonezone.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2010EJOncArticle.pdf

[Anonymous]

Dariusz Leszczynski. Wireless Communication and Health: Future of the Research and the Precautionary Principle. EMANET2015. Mesrin, Turkey. Nov 13, 2015. Slides: http://bit.ly/1NQnCkQ

Dr. Leszczynski presented this keynote address today at the EMANET2015 electromagnetics conference.

Following are his conclusions:
Currently available scientific evidence, although inconclusive, indicates that health of the ‘to-be-determined’ part of the population is possibly affected.
Radiation dosimetry needs to be significantly improved in epidemiological and EHS studies.
Objective data on effects of radiation on human body should be collected using screening approaches of transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics.
While waiting for the conclusive evidence, what will take several tens of years, Precautionary Principle should be implemented as broadly as possible and feasible.
Whenever possible and feasible, wired connections should be promoted over wireless
Dr. Leszczynski is an Adjunct Professor of Biosciences at the University of Helsinki, Finland. He worked at Finland's STUK--Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority for 22 years and has 18 years of research experience on EMF and health. He was one of the 31 experts convened by the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer that classified cell phone and other wireless radiation "possibly carcinogenic to humans."

The slides for his presentation are available at http://bit.ly/1NQnCkQ

He is a World Health Expert. The slides specifically state schools should not use wireless.

[Anonymous]

All this cell phone versus wifi was addressed in the previous thread, just because you keep repeating the same thing does not make it true.

Guess what, the EARTH emits radiation, but still live here.

[Anonymous]

Are you the same poster about the cell phone towers Jeff banned?

[Anonymous]

The radiation we are exposed to by wireless over the last twenty years is thousands of times higher than previous natural background levels

[Anonymous]

Ugh, this has taken over my neighborhood list serve. Same poster? HUGE blocks of text and a loooooooong letter to the MCPS CEO. Why can't they just do a regular pen and paper petition like every other Luddite?

[Anonymous]

This poster is a spambot. I was on the PTA board last year and somehow she got the old boards email addresses. I was getting messages on my personal email until I blocked her.

She is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, does not really understand science or what wifi is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This poster is a spambot. I was on the PTA board last year and somehow she got the old boards email addresses. I was getting messages on my personal email until I blocked her.

She is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, does not really understand science or what wifi is.

Oh, ok. Thanks.
--21:17

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This poster is a spambot. I was on the PTA board last year and somehow she got the old boards email addresses. I was getting messages on my personal email until I blocked her.

She is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, does not really understand science or what wifi is.

HE is a phd scientist. Who are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

The spambot that is send me long letters to zuckerman with mcps is a LCSW.

I seriously doubt any of the cut and paste proponents are PhD level scientists. Unless Chicken Little university is offering a doctorate.