On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 07:19 AM, Michelle Gross wrote: (In Part) There's been a lot of talk on the list about adding Wi-Fi capacity through the Minneapolis Parks Board. Here's an interesting article regarding a school district that is using the technology now.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A pioneering elementary school district outside Chicago has been sued for installing a wireless (news - web sites) computer network by parents worried that exposure to the network's radio waves could harm their children. - - - On Friday, 10 Oct 2003 23:12:45 -0500 Chris Johnson wrote: (In Part) I wonder if all of those parents involved in this law suit would be willing to sign an affidavit stating that they do not and have not ever used a portable telephone, cell phone, microwave oven, color TV, baby monitor or other high frequency wireless device in their homes or the presence of children. All or most of the foregoing are as dangerous or more so than Wi-Fi networks. The article actually does not make it clear that the school in question is even using Wi-Fi, but then the article writer probably doesn't have much of a clue about wireless networks anyway. The article does state the school started using wireless in 1995, which was before the Wi-Fi Alliance was even formed (in 1999). REPLY: I am curious about why parents in a suburban school district are just now filing a suit against a system that has been in place since 1995. Are there unusual health problems showing up in the students who attended the school? Wi-Fi is certainly a tech wonder. Further, you can install the system without tearing up the building or wiring the heck out of green spaces. It is quick, easy, and less expensive than a hardwired system. However, there are always consequences to any decision. I think that the Park Board should look into the reasons behind the lawsuit and any medical findings that may have prompted it. The lawsuit may be an over reaction or it may even be silly. That would be the fault of the lawyers who filed it. It is not necessarily based on the reasons for the parents concern. I served in the U.S. Navy for four years working in Electronic Counter Measures and Detection and Sonar. Chris Johnson is certainly correct about the relative emissions from common devices. There is also speculation that the frequencies of emissions may be as important as the transmission power when looking at human health concerns. The age and development stage of the human may also be a major factor. It certainly sounds like a good topic for a combined PHD thesis in biochemistry, medicine, and physics. As to baby monitors, I found my ears, eyes and nose (particularly my nose) to be extremely useful baby monitoring devices. If I did not have one of those senses, I would have sought or made a supplemental device or procedure. Although Wi-Fi is quick, easy, and relatively inexpensive, I think that the Park Board should proceed cautiously when installing this or any other extensive and expensive system. What are the maintenance costs and skills? There are consequences we know and those that we may or may not timely discover. Thanks. John O'Neal Shenanigans Watch Northeast Minneapolis (Holland) [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
