According to Apple’s product information guide, iPads can emit even more radiation than cell phones.http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1524/en_US/iPad_Important_Product_Information_Guide.pdf Also, the scientific literature clearly shows that children absorb more radiation than adults.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21999884
According to the scientific evidence itself, in our opinion, it would be reasonable to state that children who use iPads for long periods of time are likely to have a significantly increased risk of developing cancer. Equally worrying is that in my opinion, children may actually suffer severe reproductive harm. So what kind of risk are we talking about? Isn’t that really the question? According to high quality independently funded research by Dr. Lennart Hardell of Sweden:
For every 100 hours of cellphone use, the risk of brain cancer increases by 5%.
So how many hours would children in Fullerton schools be exposed?
175 days x 6 hours = 875 hours per year.
That means after each year of exposure to these wireless devices there would be a 44% increased risk of brain cancer.
After 13 years, this comes to a 572% increased risk of cancer, for adults that is. For children, the increased risk would be much more, as research shows that they have at least double the risk of adults.
So according to these calculations, children would have an 1100% increased risk of brain cancer as a result of using an iPad at school. This does not include time spent doing homework or other extraneous activities. WiFi enabled devices such as tablets and laptops in the classroom possibly emit as much or more high frequency pulse modulated microwave radiation as a cell phone and they are in direct proximity to the children’s sensitive developing reproductive areas.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE LINK BELOW FROM THE LARGEST TRIAL BAR IN THE WORLD AS THEY WEIGH IN ON THE FCC’S RF EXPOSURE GUIDELINES.
13-84 09-03-2013 American Association For Justice 7520942173
FOLKS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OUR CHILDREN HERE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OUR FUTURE. LET’S SHOW THAT WE CARE AND NOT JUST ACT LIKE IT.
#1 by Pletka's Alma Matter on September 25, 2013 - 9:57 pm
University of California, Irvine June 2008
EH&S; Radiation Safety Division
WHAT IS WI-FI AND IS IT SAFE?
Wi-Fi is an acronym for “wireless fidelity” and it refers to a wireless network for computers that uses
radiofrequency radiation for communication just like cell phones and two-way radios (walkie-talkies) do.
Communication across a Wi-Fi network is very similar to two-way radio communication:
1. A computer’s wireless adapter translates data into a radiofrequency signal and transmits the data
using an antenna to a nearby wireless router.
2. The wireless router receives the signal and decodes it. It sends the information to the Internet using a wired Ethernet connection. The Ethernet is a widely-used local area network (LAN) technology, with
a local area network referring to a wireless computer network covering a small geographic area such as a home, an office, or a school.
3. The process also works in reverse, with the router receiving information from the Internet, translating
it into a radiofrequency signal, and then sending it via an antenna to the computer’s wireless adapter.
Since Wi-Fi systems emit high-frequency electromagnetic radiation (at either 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz, with a GHz
[gigahertz] being a frequency of one billion cycles per second), some concern has been raised regarding the safety of using a Wi-Fi system. But these systems generally emit at a very low power — typically about 0.1
Watt emitted from both the computer antenna and the router antenna. The power falls off very rapidly
beyond a few inches from the antennas. In comparison, cell phones emit between 0.6 Watts and 3 Watts
(typically at about 1 Watt), generally at 1.9 GHz.
There is a good deal of controversy nowadays about potential health effects caused by Wi-Fi radiation.
Currently, it is believed by most scientists that Wi-Fi radiation exposure is safe for most people with the possible exception being small children exposed for long periods of time. Although no health effects in children have been identified, it is recommended that children not sit for hours daily with a Wi-Fi laptop on their laps; placing the computers on a table is much better. The same thing goes for cell phone use by children — use is acceptable, but spending hours a day on a cell phone is discouraged as a precautionary measure even though definitive health effects have not been observed in studies.
Of course, the exposure to Wi-Fi radiation is somewhat additive if a person is in a room full of others on WiFi. But since the radiation intensity drops off so rapidly with distance from the Wi-Fi emitting source (e.g.,the laptop antennas), most of a user’s exposure is from his/her own system unless other users are within a few feet away.
In conclusion, exposure to Wi-Fi radiation is presently considered to be very safe. Studies on possible
health effects caused by long-term Wi-Fi (and cell phone) radiation exposure continue to be conducted.
Some good websites for further reading regarding potential Wi-Fi radiation health effects are listed below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6676129.stm
http://www.redherring.com/Home/3752
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6172257.stm
#2 by Joe Imbriano on September 27, 2013 - 9:31 am
“Currently, it is believed by most scientists that Wi-Fi radiation exposure is safe for most people with the possible exception being small children exposed for long periods of time. Although no health effects in children have been identified, it is recommended that children not sit for hours daily with a Wi-Fi laptop on their laps; placing the computers on a table is much better. The same thing goes for cell phone use by children — use is acceptable, but spending hours a day on a cell phone is discouraged as a precautionary measure……”
Welcome to the FSD’s wireless classroom model where it appears that the aforementioned is ignored along with everything else we have brought to the table thus far by UCI graduate Robert Pletka, four of the five board members and the entire FSD administration including ALL of the principals-every last one of them.
As my wife and I gazed over the 700 children with their families at the Acacia elementary family picnic day, I was reminded that these children are expecting parents, teachers, and administrators to be looking out for them.
Have the parents been misled by district officials? The administration appears to have their heads in the sand with the likes of Karen Whisnant and Nancy Regitz who willingly continue to choose to look the other way as they both refused information on the potential dangers of wireless classrooms I attempted to present to them yesterday at my child’s conference. They are turning their backs on the kids by ignoring the expert warnings http://www.wifiinschools.com/lausd-testimony.html and are ignoring the scientific evidence http://www.national-toxic-encephalopathy-foundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Biological_and_Health_Effects_of_Microwave_Radio_Frequency_Transmissions.pdf. We will do no such thing ladies and gentlemen. You have my word on that.
#3 by Anonymous on September 28, 2013 - 1:30 pm
This is disgusting behavior by the staff, all of them. The Board doesn’t deserve a medal either. Where the heck are they in the thick of this?
#4 by Angie B on September 29, 2013 - 11:07 am
The Board has been reached out to on many, many occasions. As they continue to roll out the wireless classrooms, you can only conclude that they are okay with this.
The Boards are equally responsible for the District’s actions.
#5 by Schulzee on September 29, 2013 - 8:23 pm
I don’t think it’s fair to assume that they are ignoring the scientific “evidence”. It sounds like they probably looked at all the evidence on the subject, not just your biased information. Please tell us, did you provide them with any studies supporting the safety of EMF? Why not? So, I’m going to propose that they are ignoring you, not the data on EMF. It’s ok, telling people what to think never worked out well for me either…
#6 by for Schulzee on October 2, 2013 - 6:06 pm
Maybe it’s fair to assume that they are listening to you, Schulze.
Are you advising them that these radiation emissions are okay for our children?
#7 by amateur night on October 3, 2013 - 3:05 pm
Wow
#8 by Mass mom on October 1, 2013 - 6:12 pm
Thank you. We need people you out here. It is promising to see a movement like this in California. You know what they say about California. Best of luck to you watching from across the land.
#9 by David Morrison on September 29, 2013 - 9:57 am
Who are these scientists that say it is safe? Look at their connections to industry. Most have industry ties, either through funding or stock holdings. This has been shown over and over again.
#10 by Joe Imbriano on October 3, 2013 - 8:18 am
Look at the investment pools for CalSTRS and CalPERS. Look at the conflicts of interests in the various districts. Look at what is in the textbooks. Look at the worldview of those in positions of power. 2 plus 2 equals 4. It is hidden in plain view.