主播大秀

So then, Wodka got him in the end, an end many Russians experienced through the years of Soviet (Socialist) Rule.

Dear Newsnight

surely the real danger to Challenger tanks and our troops are the way they are being deployed by our politicians, rather than any inherent weaknesses.
Surely the British army is being weakened in Iraq because of the way it has being used in a way that maximises its vulnerability while increasing the effectiveness of the poorly equipped insurgents we face.

Why we are conducting a campaign in a way that maximises the chances of our enemies, I'm not exactly sure

There鈥檚 no point teaching our officers Military history and tactics at Sandhurst if the Politicians can get away with forcing them to fight a war in a way contrary to established principles of war.

Yours
Bob Goodall

It took experience to create a civilised society ...responsibility is only an animality

Responsibility is an animality and animals want the power of control...

There is an expectation that despite principality a man can get his goal..

We are supporters not behaviours and in each reality we have not developed a role

We have trouble so quickly discovering the experience for successful progress and interaction when all we have is a soul...

BCD TLC

David Cameron鈥檚 comments that social responsibility is the key to changing juvenile bad behaviour may be correct; but how does he reconcile social responsibility with rich, educated young men wrecking restaurants for kicks?

Will Newsnight ever ask him this question, or is this a taboo subject for interviews?

"Yeltsin had greater better communisms... democracy is just the lowest form of communism... an expression of the most unjust lives that are the least understood and the most disliked..supported to bias the economy and death rates..."

Bad behaviour in the classroom and bad behaviour on the streets.
Well quite frankly the ex teacher did not need to bother herself with her undercover reporting with this subject matter because i and many millions can tell you that children have ruled the roost in schools for years, a bit like prisoners in their comfortable cells .The trendy teaching methods introduced in the 1960s have been a wholesale failure, and the removal of discipline from the class room and taking away the rights of parents to disipline their children from the "Guardian brigades well meaning interfering do-gooders and destroyers of all things good" has left the teaching profession more like 'young persons management and blade avoidence skills facilitators'.
The teacher that appeared in tonights newsnight interview said all the things most people with a brain already know, its a pity that the 'general teaching council' still dont get it, as they are a bunch of self serving brain-dead and head in the sand useless waste of space and organ types, and to think somebody could use a good liver, (Bill Hicks one liner got in there somehow, but to help illistrate my point, it stays)and they still apply their failed doctrine with the trendy teaching methods which has not only destoyed two generations with poor education, but has left the rest of us, decent law-abiding citicens having to put up with bad behaviour from these ingrates on our streets.
oh, i can imagine you out there in the teaching world, disagreeing with me on my words and sentiments, and i must be some old fuddy duddy pensioner who remembered how good the war was; well your wrong folks, i have five daughters from 13yrs through to 25yrs and my experience with their various schools was a nightmare. Parents evening was a study in itself. I learnt early on that to be a teacher, the only skill required was to 'speak and plead' and anybody can become a teacher, the more stupid you are, the better you will get on in the profession, and more importantly, where are all the male teachers? One primary school was completely free of any male teacher for years, and no disipline was evident ever. Even when i inquired to one teacher, what was the schools policy regarding punishment for bad behaviour, her response was total astonishment that i thought disipline was an option, she then explained that rather than chastise or punish "we like to understand rather than condem bad behaviour". that comment was ringing in my ears for a very long time, a longer and painful ringing was proberbly in my young daughters ears, when little johnny nearly caved her head in on the climbing frame.

John Major once said that "we need to get back to basics", sadly he was to busy with Edwina to follow through with it. Heres my proposal to improve the schools that are failing in all depts (all of them, well most, as we can exclude grammers from this, as disipline has not being totally forgotton in them) encourage ex military to join the teaching profession with free reign to punish. For example, if a spotty faced scroat gives a bit of cheek or is playing up in the class room, the said ex military(male) and now a teacher, takes the said scroat out of the class room and kicks seven shades of s*** out of him, it sounds a bit extream but works every time, just watch the bullying and bad behaviour statistics fall; there you go, a quick and easy fix, a simple solution i alway thought.

As for the general teaching council, well they need to swing from the gallows, for their madness and general bad methods which, in turn has blighted our lives and they need to pay.
"Why so happy mr wallace?", "well ive just seen a load of teachers swing, not a man amongst them, how strange is that!"

The Mr Wallace mint compitition time:
which is the odd one out and why
1 dog
2 cat
3 a member of the general teachers council.

calls cost a fortune, and if your dumb enough to enter this and wait on the phone for ages with no chance of winning...................?

my shift has ended and a winner has been chosen, but keep those calls a commin, you fools.

Caught the end of the interview with teacher turned broadcaster. Why didn't Newsnight ask her about teaching unions having long campaigned against having CCTV in classrooms? From what I've read unions say their members don't want head teachers to be able to spy on what teachers do in the classroom. Pot... kettle... black.

Two films from "undercover teachers" were broadcast in 2005, one by Ch4 (on "7/11") and one by Ch5. Both showed what Ruth Kelly had already publicly acknowledged was a widespread and growing problem in our schools,in fact it was a campaigning issue! The filming added next to nothing new, it just furthered the publicity.

As I understand it, the problem now is that in both cases, these two "undercover supply teachers/journalists" broke professional rules of conduct through filming pupils without parental permission. Teachers have a duty care towards pupils and their parents. Some of these disruptive pupils are at risk and on the Child Protection Register. This is obviously a sensitive matter. Teachers/schools need to seek parental permission before filming and certainly before broadcasting. These supply "teachers" must have known this, and the legal advisors to Ch4 and Ch5 most certainly did. These supply teachers were journalists more than teachers.

Whilst some will consider public interest to have balanced these other concerns, and whilst some efforts were made by Ch4 and Ch5 to disguise the identities of pupils, we should acknowledge that there is a child protection precedent here. As the minister for education had acknowledged the scope of the problem before these programmes went out, one has to ask whose interests were ultimately being served by these broadcasts. No doubt the GTC will shed some light on this.

Next time someone says that there are no known mechanisms by which weak electromagnetic fields can have biological effects, ask them to visit: -

You will find in it an article that I wrote recently explaining in non-mathematical but science-based terms just how such effects arise. It contains many references to work published in peer reviewed journals and explains most of the known biological effects from risks to fertility to interference with brain function. I don't ask you to believe it; just read it and make up your own mind.

Andrew Goldsworthy BSc PhD
Honorary Lecturer in Biology
Imperial College London

Prima facie, David Cameron's call for social responsibility seems akin to the police calling for less crime or teachers calling for better work from kids. How eactly does his party propose to engineer this?

I was disappointed with last nights programme and comments about Wifi and the dangers of electromagnetic fields. This is a medical problem for many people and we simply cannot wait for scientists to continue arguing while allowing many people to suffer.

I am a member of the EMF Discussion Group which is chaired by Sir William Stewart, Chairman for the Health Protection Agency.

I am a trustee for the EM Radiation Research Trust in the UK www.radiationresearch.org .
Founder of campaign group SCRAM (seriously concerned residents against masts) www.scram.uk.com and am now a member of HESE UK

Please view the enclosed websites for research, how much more do we need?

I have no doubt in my mind that I am a victim to long term exposure to radiation from a phone mast. Five years ago I developed breast cancer at the age of 38 with no history of breast cancer in my family.

Breast cancer had an enormous impact on my life and the lives of my family. It has been a long hard battle not only against breast cancer, but also against the insensitive siting of the T-Mobile phone mast which was 100 metres from my home. I now live in a cancer cluster which is one of many we have since discovered around phone masts after long term exposure.

If only I'd known about the research in connection with EMF's, I might have realised that it is not a good idea to live 100 metres from a 22.5 metre phone mast. Out of our tiny hamlet in Wishaw four other ladies developed breast cancer at the same time out of the 18 houses around surrounding the mast and one man died of motor neurone disease. I had been living next to the mast for over seven years before I was diagnosed with breast cancer. If only I had been told about the dangers, I might have realised that the years of suffering with sleep problems, headaches, vertigo, skin rashes, heart palpitations and low white blood cells had all been connected to radiation from the phone mast.

Read the following paragraph by Dr Robert O. Becker, M.D. he was twice nominated for the Nobel Prize for his research into EMF鈥檚.

鈥淚 have no doubt in my mind that at the present time, the greatest polluting element in the earth鈥檚 environment is the proliferation of electromagnetic fields. I consider that to be far greater on a global scale, than warming, and the increase in chemical elements in the environment.鈥欌��

Kind Regards
Eileen O鈥機onnor

Here are a few more remarks on the decline of social responsibility:

see also:

Comment No. 546434
Comment No. 546686

I did not watch Newsnight but would like to comment.

I cannot watch TV as it causes discomfort and pain since I because electromagnetically sensitive to some of the technologies using pulsed microwave radiation.

TETRA caused my sensitivity in the first place but as other technologies were added and high powered testings were carried out I became sensitive to more.

Since 2005 I have had protection and even this did not leave me free to lead a normal life.

However, in January this year I was told that I cannot be protected from
WiFi mixing with TETRA, I can only
be treated for the effects. (Not by a GP or the NHS I must say, because they have not been informed of the KNOWN and well doccumented effects of pulsed microwave radiation)

As I became breathless with chest pain, had other unpleasant symptoms and sometimes collapsed, I realised I had to move for the third time in 3 years or so.

I heard from other affected people
that your coverage was biased and that there was a slight innuendo of
a "put down" in your treatment of Sarah Dacre's case. As I didn't watch the program I cannot comment
but I remember an incident a few years ago when this did happen to someone I know who is also sensitive
to these new technologies, so I do wonder.

The 主播大秀 and other media outlets need to be seen to be fair and unbiased
regardless.

As Sir William Stewart, Chairman of the Health Protection Agency, wants children in schools to be monitored for ill-effects from the WiFi network, and a teacher's union representing 35,000 staff are asking
for an enquiry, why on earth are we covering towns and cities with this untested technology?

We "sensitives" know what this technology can do to humans and we
watch what is happening to animal life. Others who are not "sensitised"
will have no warning.

Why wait for the science (that is already out there and ignored or
discredited) if it could put your children at risk? At the very least
the 主播大秀 could do a bit more research and find out what we already know.

Why do we always seem to discuss this subject as if the technologies are disparate. We are not talking about a single device in a single room, more realistically we are talking milions of phones, wifi routers, dect phones and goodness knows whatelse all let loose in the public domain in less than 2 decades. It defies logic that whenever these debates arise that no one ever simply states the holistic picture, the layer upon layer of (non inonising radiation)we are now all exposed to, where is it to stop ? what is the straw that breaks the camels back ? Personal illness, illness of a loved one perhaps - Lets do a count of our individual exposures to all these linked technologies and those with any moral fortitude will surely begin to ask those vital questions - Bad things happen when good men/women do nothing !

I have just watched the interview with Mr Bolton, he came over as a very rude man but, looking at it from his point of view, Gavin Esler is a well known left wing guy, he hates the USA and is anti uk & usa forces in Iraq, in fact, does anyone know of any 主播大秀 reporter that isn't anti Iraq and anti USA? So looking at it from Mr Boltons side, he must have known that he wouldn't get someone that would be willing to see things from his point of view, its sad but, today in the UK we have only 4 main tv stations that everyone gets, the 主播大秀, Channel 4 and 5 and ITV, out of them, there is only 1 that doesn't have a left wing view! how can that be good for this country? One good thing that came out of the interview, when Mr Bolton asked Esler what alternative if any, he would offer, end of interview!

I hope that, with the deluge of recent publicity on the possible health risk of electromagnetic devices and apparatus, that we can get some robust advice to our medical professionals to aid them in diagnosing "radiation sickness". I believe we are seeing much more illness which can be attributed to this relatively new technology, to which we are being exposed at an ever increasing rate.

We also need specialised clinics - which are emissions-free, as it is surely a case of gross abuse of human rights to expect a sufferer to attend a hospital (who are about to lift the ban on mobile phones) or clinic - often under the cloud of a plethora of mobile phone masts.

Hi,

The idea that wi-fi symptoms are psychosomatic is an insult to people who suffer with electrical sensitivity.

I have never heard such neanderthal thinking:

1) The theory that because the level or energy emitted by routers is so low if it doesn't heat you it can't kill you has the same logic as all those intellingent people who thought smoking was safe or that mercury amalgams are safe. (There is NO "no observable effect level" with mercury - it is toxic even in microgram levels). Remember they were telling people in the 80's that their chronic fatigue was psychosomatic because the science hadn't caught up with the produced health effects.

2) Wifi radio frequencies have one marked characteristic that is different from other radio frequencies. You are exposed to them 24 hours a day. (Obviously those unfortunate to live next to masts are exposed 24/7). When you talk on a mobile you are only exposed to high levels of radiation for the duration of the call.

Also the signal is PULSED. My netgear router kicked out a 3 Hertz pulsed frequency that effectively makes your laptop similar to a mobile phone - that is a beacon for the pulsed signal.

3) The frequencies emitted by the heart can be measured up to 8 feet away. The problem is that there is a process known as ENTRAINMENT where the heart quite literally becomes disturbed by the pulsing frequencies the router emits. Atter 6 months in front of one trust me when I say that I had sleepless, agitation, blurred vision, and heat irregularities - very strong heart beat despite no physical exertion.

4) The industry is so new that there have not been enough scientific studies over a long enough time period to sufficiently determine the true nature of this problem. It can take over 10 years for tumors to form.
The HPA even admit their are "holes in their knowledge!" Animal tests have only been conducted for a few years- oh great....

5) A researcher (who spoke at the World Health Org. & the Government), came round and explained this to me personally. So use an ethernet cable especially if you have children.

Perhaps the Newsnight team might someday present the results of one of their hard hitting investigations into the extent to which modern Third Sector 'charities' truly provide voluntary and effective support to those who one traditionally thinks of worthy beneficiaries rather than serving as a tax shelter and means to earn a living out of the overly trusting and vulnerable?

I'm surprised nobody hs calle to say thanks for the masterly and informative brief on the French elections from Alan Little in the best Reithian traditions: a contrast to some of the other talking head staffers you use. Compare and contrast with Mr Frei who has discovered 1000 ways of telling us that he thinks GWB is a BF. He might be right but try giving intelligent viewers the facts and letting them make up their own minds. Alan used to present Newsnight sometimes: I suppose it's too much to hope that he might come back some day. You only have one really good anchor left and you don't use her often enough.

People who have discovered they have a reaction to Wi-fi or DECT phones have proven this to themselves by removing the offending radiating object and obtaining relief. This is all the proof I need, plus the fact that I get EMF symptoms myself from sitting in front of a computer( and not a Wi Fi one)It is illustrative exactly what our Government rates as important, that the rep from the HPC assures us that children will be monitored for health while being exposed to Wi-fi. I am furious on behalf of all parents. I don't understand why more parents arent up in arms. Children are our future and we should take care of them very, very well.

There appear to be a high proportion of females subscribing to the Hz hurt hypothesis, but their demand for scientific evidence appears to range from low to non existent.

Has everyone else noticed this?

I suffer from electrohypersensitivity and get headaches, memory and concentration problems from mobile/DECT phones and WiFi networks. I hope very few people get this condition because it is hard to live with. Until the pathology of this disease is understood the government should adopt the precautionary principle. At the very least there should be a moratorium on the deployment of WiFi into schools.

Whilst there has been an increase in the incidence of anxiety, depression and other stress related disorders over the past couple of decades, it's unlikely, given the physical and biological evidence, to be attributable to the proliferation of wireless technologies. The fact that some people may get some relief through taking steps to remove what they think are the causes of their distress, does not ipso facto establish those agents as the causes.

See #13 and the referenced comments, and take a look at how 'credit assignment' or 'superstition' works in shaping all of our operant behaviour (i.e our 'voluntary' behaviour).

That's what the snake-oil sales-folk do!

I didn't see the program but I have removed my dec phone and have moved our beds to enable us to get better rest. the closest mobile phone mast is over 500m away but the emissions hit our upstairs. before the changes I would wake in the morning with my face "on fire" and this got progressively worse. I HASTEN TO ADD THE RASH APPEARED LONG BEFORE I KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT EMF'S. the doctors could not find anything that would help this rash. they did not offer me any meaningful assistance. We still do not feel that we are refreshed from a nights sleep.
My children would not be going to a school with WIFI, i resent the fact i can not protect them from emissions in our home. i can choose to give them organic food to protect them from pesticides and chemicals, i can choose chemical free detergent, i can choose not to have tobacco smoke around them but yet the Government allows the telecomms industry to profit from an "unknown" (in their eyes - although there is plenty of international reserach if they would just open their eyes) quanity and hide behind a completely unsuitable emmission guidelines (why do we have the highest levels in almost all the world?)which they are allowed to bombard my house 24 hours a day every day, and this is the same for just about everyone and yet children are at risk from being bombared with the same pulsing in school too through WIFI, DEC phones, teachers mobile phones, neighbours WIFI, WIFI in shops, digital baby monitors the list goes on... it all adds up when there is no respite from it.
friends of mine who are very pro-mobile phone commented on the fact they always felt tired. I asked when this started they told me, i then asked if they had WIFI they said yes, I asked when did they get it, the timing coincided.
I go to my friends house who lives 300m from a mast (and is in the main beam) and I feel burning under my glasses' frame.
PLEASE WAKE UP GOVERNMENT AND LOOK AFTER PEOPLE INSTEAD OF THE COFFERS OF INDUSTRY. HAVEN'T YOU LEARNT THE LESSONS OF TOBACCO, CHEMICALS, ASBESTOS?????

can i just ask if Adrienne works for the mobile phone industry or if she is basing her opinions on any actual experiences that she has encountered?
i have experinced things first hand and when i was trying to find an answer for my "rash" as it was spreading over my body and very visable and red and burnt and itched, i also came across a women who is completely affected by EMFs. i do not consider myself ES but i now know this ES sufferer well and she is 100% genuine, it affects her whole life, she has tried to take proactive steps (and has quite a positive outlook on life) to combat it but can not escape it. whislt she was visiting m eonce my husband came home and i saw her face turn to pain - he had left his mobile on in his pocket - she didn't know that (he is normally very good at turning his phone off when he comes into the house because of the children) but i did just looking at her.
what is the issue in these people getting assistance? in Sweden you do, why should UK people get the same help.

Wifi protection.
Please can any one help? my mum suffers from all these extra electronic activity in the air and has taken her years to slowly get better. I have watched the interview again but can not make out the name of the material the lady used in the interview on Newsnight 23rd April. Does anyone know what this material is called and where can I get it from?
Thanks

Anecdotal (N=1) first hand experience is not good scientific evidence, at least, not in the absence of a lot more (in these cases, genetic/physiological) data and measured exposure under controlled conditions).

Stress is not 'psychological', it's *physical*, so (obviously) it has 'somatic' (physical) consequences (raised BP for some, rashes for others, it's likely to be largely a function of genotype diversity). The concept 'psycho-somatic' is therefore not very helpful. Behaving in ways which give one some degree of control will often reduce stress, but that doesn't mean that the perceived, and avoided or mitigated, stressors are indeed the actual culprits. Few informed researchers now deride the so-called 'placebo effect' as 'placebos' are known to have real physiological/behavioural effects, i.e. they are clinically helpful/efficacious. But, this does present a bit of a dilemma when advising people.

On the other hand, to persuade the scientific community that the recent proliferation of WiFi is biologically hazardous, it must be shown how it is so, and the fact is that currently there's no good scientific evidence for that. If any scientifically trained folk think there *is* credible research evidence, by all means reference it. This would need to show (at bare minimum) how WiFi energy, at environmental levels, *directly* changes stress hormones or CNS transmitters 'in vivo'. What's required is causal scientific evidence.

The basic advice is always that if someone finds something helpful, and it's cost effective in terms of cash and the balance of benefit/harm, doesn't hard others etc, by all means do it, but don't confuse anecdotal personal experience with scientific evidence.

Adrienne seems to be trying hard to convince those who are unsure that there is not a problem!

The science is out there but ignored or discredited. I suggest Adrienne researches pulsed microwave radiation with an open mind.

Meanwhile, we have great forests of wisps of smoke here. Do we call for the fire brigade or wait for the science to prove it is a fire!

Is this then a world-wide hysteria
or "all in the mind" state? Try researching the problems in many other countries, Adrienne.

By the way, what happens when something is harmful and it provides too much profit??

Whilst "wisps of smoke" are all about us, and very distressing, the problem for us all is that of reliable 'credit assignment' (i.e. the reliable identification and management of causal relations). If "wisps of smoke" and the proliferation of "pulsed microwave" technology are just temporally coincidental, assigning credit/blame to the latter is ipso facto unjust ( and even potentially harmful to others). Reliable 'credit assignment' is the difficult business of science, and research to date indicates that one should look elsewhere for the fire. If interested in looking further than the nearest lamp-post, have a look at the last two comments provided in the CIF link referenced in Comment 13.

These are indeed stressful times, but sadly, there are no quick fixes.

Hi Adrienne,

There are a broad range of papers that show non-thermal effects from mobile phone signals. To address your specific request here is a paper that uses a single blind protocol and shows that exposure to mobile phone signals results in worse allergic responses in atopic dermatitis. The study also shows an increase in a neurotransmitter and a stress hormone.

H. Kimata (2002)
Enhancement of Allergic Skin Wheal Responses by Microwave Radiation from Mobile Phones in Patients with Atopic Eczema/Dermatitis Syndrome.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2002;129:348-350

Regards,

Rod

Yesterday, I posted two follow-ups in response to the above response but as of 11am 2nd May, both have yet to appear. This one summarises what they said. The gist of yesterday's posts and links was to advise any interested readers look up the above author's 2003 and 2004 papers by name, and to take a closer look at what was actually measured in the 2002 paper (i.e. was it microwaves or was it a 'ringing' mobile?). The abstract doesn't make that clear, so the methods section of the full paper would have to be scrutinised closely. Additionally, look closely at what the dependent measures were (they were blood plasma peptides not central neurotransmitters or stress hormones). In short, what was the evidence of a specific effect of microwaves on any central physiological dependent variables which mediate stress responses (or of microwaves at all for that matter)?

Subsequent papers in 2003 and 2004 by the same author contrasted
'frequently ringing mobile phones', 'sitting by a busy road' and 'playing video games', and 'slep deprivation' with the effect reported in the first paper.

Therapeutically, the author went on to examine the efficacy of a) laughter (Mr Bean and Charlie Chaplain seemed to work), b) a little Mozart, c) kissing and d) even sexual intercourse in countering such reactions!

The basic message is I believe as I suggested before, namely that life stressors exacerbate rashes in those genetically predisposed to such responses.

So, apart from a quick lesson in science, surely the best one can conclude from these studies is that if one plans to campaign against Wi-Fi on behalf of some folk who appear to adversely react to modern technologies, one really needs to consider just how much wider one should cast one's net if one doesn't wish to be offend others by just picking on randomly annoying elements of modern life as doing so might not just annoy others, bt, unknown to you, such behaviour might bring some folk out in more than just rashes!

Hi Adrienne,

The full text of the paper I referenced is available on the h.e.s.e uk web site. I've tried posting a link to it but the message containing the link was never added to the blog.
The methods section states: "In the microwave radiation study, 26 patients viewed an 60-min video featuring weather information, while having 26 mobile phones calling for 60 min without sound. Since it was difficult to hold the mobile phone at the ear for 1 hour, the mobile phone was tied around the neck by string and consequently placed 4 cm below the chin. In the control study, 26 patients viewed an 60-min video featuring weather information, while having 26 mobile phones without calling." It appears that the investigators were looking for effects caused by a mobile phone in use and not from the sound of the phone repeatedly ringing.

I'm not anti technology, I used to be a computer consultant and adopted WiFi in my home and workplace in 2001. After 18 months of increasing illness I had all of the WiFi equipment removed. I no longer get symptoms provided I avoid microwave sources, WiFi/mobile phones/DECT phones. This isn't an abstract debate for me, I've had to give up a well paid job, move house, and subsist as I don't have a recognised condition. My hope is that in the near future the evidence will be sufficient for the condition to be recognised and technology adapted so that it doesn't harm other people. If the precautionary principle is ignored and WiFi continues to be rolled out in schools a large number of young people may be harmed before the condition is recognised. Installing wired networks instead of wireless networks is a low impact solution until the evidence is clear.

I'm happy to point to other research showing non-thermal effects from microwave signals but if your agenda is debunk that people can be made unwell by microwave radiation I won't bother.

Regards,

Rod

I suggest you follow up the other references as I advised, and give the following some thought.

The essential method of all empirical science (cf. Quine or Popper for the theory but ask any scientist for the practice) is to try to "debunk" not prove. The task is to hypothecate causal functional relations between measures over variables and to try to test i.e. falsify those conjectures not to prove them (which one can never do).

The latter, sadly, is precisely how pseudoscience operates, and alas, that shares much in common with our everyday common sense judgement or 'folk psychology'

This is why science is so difficult.

Hi Adrienne,

Kimata's research area is on atopic dermatitis so its unsurprising that they have examined various environmental factors that alter the severity of atopic dermatitis. As your original comment requested "If any scientifically trained folk think there *is* credible research evidence, by all means reference it. This would need to show (at bare minimum) how WiFi energy, at environmental levels, *directly* changes stress hormones or CNS transmitters 'in vivo'."

The Kimata paper I referenced states:

"It is true that SP and VIP increase in stress reaction. However, the failure of increase of SP and VIP by control study without microwave radiation indicates that increase of these neuropeptides is caused by microwave radiation."

Regards,

Rod

Hi Adrienne,

As you are keen to discuss the scientific process I would be interested in your thoughts on commercially motivated "balancing" research. The recent paper by Huss et al [1] on the effect funding sources have on research outcomes in mobile phone studies is particularly relevant. The authors have analysed publications on the biological effects of mobile phone emissions and state, "studies exclusively funded by industry were indeed substantially less likely to report statistically significant effects on a range of endpoints that may be relevant to health". Also, "We found that the source of funding explains some of the heterogeneity in the results of different studies". The parallels drawn with other meta studies on drug trials is striking, "about four times more likely to have outcomes favouring the sponsor's drug than studies with other sources of funding". Of course, the key difference between EHS and pharmaceutical research is the vested interest in finding no health effects.

[1] Huss A, Egger M, Hug K, Huwiler-Muntener K, Roosli M, "Source of funding and results of studies of health effects of mobile phone use: systematic review of experimental studies", Environmental Health Perspectives 2006.

Regards,

Rod

I hope Jona Davies re-visits this article, as I would like to point her in the direction of products that may reduce the effects of EMF. I am not advertising for a particular company and have no vested interest, but during my research this is one company that stocks these types of product:

Hope this helps Jona and anyone else suffering from ES.

I would like to offer my insights on symptoms that can derive from overexposure to WIFI signals.
I have been using WIFI 802.11b/g for over 3 years without any discomforts, but recently I have started transferring large files using WIFI from my macbook pro 2.16 Ghz to an Apple Airport Express 802.11b/g then connected to a NAS.
Whenever I start the transfers I get a tingling sensation in my ears, feel a raise in the temperature of my head and start feeling agitated. At first I though it was just my mind playing tricks, then I sat my girlfriend in front of my macbook pro and started a transfer.
I then asked her if she felt any different and she described the same symptoms.
I also use a logitech vx revolution wireless mouse that uses the 2.4 Ghz band for it's receiver. And whenever I transfer files it starts behaving erratically.
There might be no studies that support the claim of hazards during normal usage, but I have been experiencing firsthand symptoms.
Here is the setting in case someone might be interested.
Apple Airport Express 802.11b/g
Multicast rate 2Mbps
Signal power 50%
Use interface robustness
Channel 10
Thank you for this opportunity to share my experiences.
Marco