Wi-fi - Why I Don't Think It's as Safe as We are Led to Believe

I spend several hours each day on my computer and have to admit I often feel really "weird".

When I've explained my symptoms to various family members they've dismissed me as neurotic and humoured me when I wear my bio guard pendants around my neck to protect me from electro magnetic fields.

If I use my mobile phone the left side of my face burns, my tongue and lips tingle, I feel a tightness in my chest as though I can't breathe properly and I get a strange pain in my left temple. I also feel sick and disorientated.

I get the same effect if I use my computer for any length of time particularly if I am in the room where we have the Wi-Fi box installed. For those of you who don't know Wi-Fi is an acronym for wireless fidelity and is a means by which people with laptop computers can move around and still be able to access the internet.

We used to use a broadband cable but because there are sometimes three people wanting to be on a computer at the same time we found wireless so much easier.

However, last night on the television there was a programme about Wi-Fi. which made me sit up and take notice because it featured some other people who experienced exactly the same problems.

It seems likely I suffer from electro sensitivity. Of course, I'd suspected that for a long time which is why I wear the bio guards but I had never made a connection with the wireless set up before. I always thought it was the computer.

In Sweden the problem is recognised as an official disability and affects about 3% of the population. If a similar figure exists in UK then I have approximately another 2 million fellow sufferers. It's strange therefore that the government currently insist there are none.

I don't believe them.

Of course my scepticism could come from the fact I've already been personally affected by two procedures which the government also insist are "safe". I've written books about both issues so you can tell I don't believe them either - at least not now.

Both mercury dental amalgam and the MMR are controversial issues and despite the fact they affect millions of people worldwide, the government insist any evidence is "anecdotal".

Who am I to argue?

Anyway, the government rely on international guidelines when they issue their statements and the World Health Organisation (WHO) who are one of the leading public health bodies in the world have said that as far as WI-FI and the radiation emitted from mobile phone masts are concerned, there are "no adverse health effects from low level long term exposure".

I don't believe them either.

After all, how do they know? I'm certainly no expert but WI-FI and mobile phones are relatively new so I don't imagine anyone has yet lived from the cradle to the grave being exposed to them which begs the question - How long is "long term exposure"?

Again in Sweden experiments have been carried out using lower levels of radiation than emitted from WI-FI and the result has been chromosome damage, a decrease in short-term memory, electro hypersensitivity and an increase in cancer.

I gathered from the programme that government guidelines are pretty much influenced by the industry and are based on the "thermal" effect as opposed to the "biological" effect these radio waves have.

That means that they would have to actually heat up your organs before they would be considered sufficiently dangerous to require restrictions on their use.

In most cities you will find WI-FI hotspots where you can use your computer. Most people have no idea when they are walking along that they are being exposed to radiation.

Even when I switch on my computer in my house I am told I am in range of various wireless connections other than my own so clearly I am not safe indoors either. Infact when I was still connected to the internet via broadband my neighbour came round with his laptop computer and was able to log on using his Wi-Fi from next door!

At the time I thought it was fantastic. Not any more!

In schools too it is becoming increasingly common for wireless networks to be installed, and currently approximately 70% of secondary and 50% of primary schools have them.

Now parents are expressing concern about the possible long term dangers to their children's health. After all their skulls are thinner and still forming so until there's conclusive evidence to the contrary, the "no known adverse health effects" statement is not very reassuring.

Protests are regularly made about siting mobile phone masts next to schools but most people do not realise WI-FI is equally as dangerous. Apparently in UK when this programme was produced (2007) there were 3000 WI-FI hotspots and 50,000 mobile phone masts.

In the programme a radiation monitor was placed next to a laptop computer in a classroom at approximately the exact position where a student's head would be. The result was the student would have been exposed to between 3 and 4 times more radiation there than if he or she had stood in the main beam of a mobile phone mast.

Scary, eh?

People have a choice whether or not to use a mobile phone but wireless networks in the classroom remove that personal decision. The programme makers did say this level of exposure would not be all the time but especially during downloads. However, since most people use computers for internet access that could most likely be a considerable amount of time.

Despite all this "anecdotal" evidence the government still insist WI-FI is safe. Until detrimental health effects have been established in a laboratory and science can PROVE there is a risk that will most likely remain their stance.

I don't believe them. Do you?