View Comments

“Microwave Radiation” and Its Effects on Children: The Debate Continues…

By AAyles on August 17th, 2010

An Ontario, Canada school board is defending its decision this week to continue the use of wireless Internet access in classrooms this fall. The debate over the use of Wi-Fi in schools has been fuelling for a while now, with some parents threatening to remove their children from school if the board doesn’t reverse their decision.

While the Simcoe County District School Board insists there is no scientific or medical evidence proving that the dizziness and nausea students are experiencing are the result of Wi-Fi transmissions, parents strongly believe otherwise.

According to CBC News, “the board will not turn off Wi-Fi access in schools this fall despite the concerns of critics who say there’s no evidence to prove radiation from wireless transmitters is safe for children as young as four.”

The board’s superintendant of education had the following to say about the controversy:

“There’s been a lot of information, but there’s nothing definitive that says wireless is causing the issues, so the board affirmed its decision for wireless communications in our schools.”

Seems like an insensitive statement when children’s lives are at stake. Shouldn’t the statement read “As a concerned party with each student’s health and well-being as our top priority, the board has decided to suspend the use of Wi-Fi until we can assure parents that wireless Internet in classrooms is not the cause of the symptoms the children are experiencing.”

Parents addressed their concerns to the board after they realized several children in 14 different schools in the Simcoe area were experiencing similar symptoms which, ironically, all went away on weekends.

Professor Magda Havas, who has studied the affects of wi-fi microwave radiation, has made his thoughts on the situation very clear:

“It is irresponsible to introduce Wi-Fi microwave radiation into a school environment where young children and school employees spend hours each day,” Havas wrote in a statement last year.
Havas insists the severity of the issue is at least as important as the caution taken with West Nile:
“I can count in my school more victims of microwave radiation than all of Canada has from West Nile virus,” he said.

You can read the full story at CBC.ca but we want to know from you: Are you concerned about the use of Wi-Fi in classrooms and the potential negative effects it could have on your children?

  • Kirsten

    60 minute panel discussion on the topic: http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/columbia-university-law-school-wireless-hazards-panel/ Very worth a watch if you’re concerned.

  • Parent

    Why would the “wi-fi” be innocent until proven guilty? Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Or is it inhumane to call any new technology “guilty” until we are sure that it is not!
    Isn’t the stake too high when children’s health is in question?
    Don’t you know that cancers can take a LONG time to show up (and we have a huge list of examples to that … e.g. smokers keep having noticeably high rates of cancer even after stopping it for decades).
    Reading the statement of the “superintendant of education” I would say that he is at least careless and irresponsible. When children’s’ health is in stake doubt is enough for a responsible person to call a cause (technology or otherwise) guilty UNTIL all the doubt is removed.
    Hopefully you’re like me, don’t want to have such an official be responsible for the health of my children.

  • arlene mae mahidlawon

    reading of the statement and will corresponce it the health and be irresponsible to other people until all doubt to removed

  • Eric in Calgary

    kinda brings to mind the thought that this might be a manifestation of the “petkau effect”…low level exposure for longer terms produces the same effects as massive short term exposure

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petkau_effect

    A lot of the radiation safety regs, probably including emf radiation are probably based on the LD50 way of thinking from the 1950s, and that might not be a correct way of thinking in this day of multiple long term exposures to multiple
    frequencies.

    Just a thought.

    Eric

blog comments powered by Disqus