Swedes hit hard by WiMAX waves

In what can only be described as extreme paranoia or as an extreme health risk, a Swedish town had a bit of a health scare upon the activation of a WiMAX base-station a few weeks ago. According to Sweden's SVT, which reported on the incident, the local hospital emergency room was flooded with calls regarding various symptoms such as headaches, difficulty breathing, blurry vision and even two cases of heart arrhythmia. All of this was mere hours after the base station was activated, and the symptoms went away once the station was deactivated, or if the sufferer moved away from that radio tower of death. Apparently Sweden was the first country to recognise electromagnetic hypersensitivity as a valid medical condition, and there are already talks of getting the government to shut down the nation's WiMAX networks while the claims are investigated. The UN recognises EHS as a "real and sometimes disabling condition," and say that around 3% of the world's population is effected by high frequency magnetic radiation in such ways. We'll wait for a few more studies to come through and completely conflict with each other so we can go on with our happily ignorant mobile lifestyles.

[Via The Inquirer]

[TSW @ Jun 12th 2006 7:45PM]

I'm going to guess 1.21 Gigawatts... each.

[Chris @ Jun 12th 2006 7:53PM]

They better not drive faster than 88MPH then.

[Major Malfunction @ Jun 12th 2006 8:07PM]

Well considering there are military weapons that perform the same function, I'm surprised that anyone questions the impact of high-energy gear. You can point a tight beam microwave transceiver at a tent and set it on fire, why not impact the electrical system of a human being, we are just that. ID 10 T error.

[treqie @ Jun 12th 2006 8:11PM]

I live in Sweden and I haven't seen anything about that in the media. That big kind of thing should have been covered in the bigger news papers by now. So my guess is BS.

[Zach @ Jun 12th 2006 8:51PM]

I'm calling this bluff, because the only other outlet I've seen reporting this is the Inquier. So until further notice - fake

[Matt @ Jun 12th 2006 8:54PM]

I've heard alot about electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EMH) but frankly it seems like bunk to me. It would be extremely easy to test whether the condition is real or just psychosomatic. Just put people who claim to have it sit in a faraday cage (to block out outside fields) and blast some with EM waves and others with nothing and see if there's a difference in reported symptoms. It's preposterous to start claiming a new disease without evidence for its existence despite the fact that it could be easily tested for.

From the WHO "The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals. Well controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms were not correlated with EMF exposure."

Also they say "It has been suggested that symptoms experienced by some EHS individuals might arise from environmental factors unrelated to EMF. Examples may include “flicker” from fluorescent lights, glare and other visual problems with VDUs, and poor ergonomic design of computer workstations. Other factors that may play a role include poor indoor air quality or stress in the workplace or living environment."

As more organizations recognize the validity of EHS new cases will surely pop up as suggestible individuals associate their headaches or fatigue or depression or whatever with exposure to EMF.

Now I'm not saying that EMF is necessarily safe. It is true that we are being bombarded with larger levels of EMF than ever and the question of the effect of long term exposure to strong levels of EMF is unanswered and needs to be studied. That being said, important studies on EMF exposure are likely to lose credibility if they get associated with pseudoscientific anecdotal studies.

[Chris @ Jun 12th 2006 9:26PM]

Continuing with the current post topic....

The LASER (Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation) gets it's name from the MAZER (Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation). Id est, we've known about the impact of high energy microwaves for quite a long time.

[Michael VH Chong @ Jun 12th 2006 9:31PM]

Nothing to do with the topic at hand but more of an editorial comment... in the article you wrote:

The UN recognises EHS as a "real and sometimes disabling condition," and say that around 3% of the world's population is effected by high frequency magnetic radiation in such ways.

I think the word 'E-ffected' should read 'A-ffected'. Just being pedantic

[Jeff Lewis @ Jun 12th 2006 10:03PM]

While we're at it - it's not valid to compare MASER and LASER and microwave ovens to WiMAX.

MASERs (and LASERs) are *coherent* electromagnetic energy. Most of the damage is caused by the coherency of the light or microwaves.

http://www.howstuffworks.com/laser.htm

Microwave ovens operate at 800W or more and on frequencies that are known to be absorbed by sugars, fats and water, around 2.5GHz. That's how they heat things.

http://home.howstuffworks.com/microwave.htm

WiMAX is none of these. It's not coherent radiation. It's not tightly focussed. It operates in two bands from 2-11GHz and 10-66GHz (so technically, the 2.5GHz zone for cooking is IN the lower band - but is a tiny fraction of the entire space), and operates at low power - 2-16W (peak of 10-75W) in the 3.5GHz band.

[Major Malfunction @ Jun 12th 2006 10:22PM]

Lets not remind everyone debunking the 'current' scientific knowledge that we once thought the world was flat, the moon was made of cheese, and Mars had life. Yes, we've moved past that and grown smarter.

Lets not put the possibility to bed... ever.

[Dr Buzzo @ Jun 13th 2006 12:16AM]

Oh god! Not this damn thing again. Please, the stupid waves coming through are hurting my brain! Look. Let me explain a few things to ya all:

Radioactive stuff makes ionizing radiation.

Radio transmitter makes RF radiation


COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. One can not assume because one is harmful the other is. The mechanism is completely different. With nuclear radiation, DNA and protines are damaged by ionization. Causes mutations, birth defects, cancer. With RF radiation, the tissue can be damaged by a heating effect and general resonating(like a microwave). The fluids are heated and damaged before you can feel it. HOWEVER, it is only dangerous in very high powers. A cell phone is not gona cook your tissues. A multi megawatt radar dish will. BUT, only if you're right near it.
Unlike nuclear radiation, it is not the total dose that matters. It has never been shown to be dangerous in very small doses.

Point number 2. INVERSE SQUARE LAW. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. INVERSE SQUARE LAW. INVERSE SQUARE LAW! GAAAAA!

What does this mean? Look it up! Okay: I'll say it simple. IF radiation from a 20 watt cell tower a couple hundred yards away is dangerous, then a 200mw cordless phone or baby monitor would give you way more radiation exposure at 5 feet. It'd probably kill you!

We've had microwave radar for 60 years. Ever wonder why there are no effective battlefield RF weapons?
INVERSE SQUARE LAW!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law

Ps. The fact that I've probably spelled something here does not make the facts wrong. It's late, and spelling is not my strong point anyways.

[Ryan @ Jun 13th 2006 2:05AM]

hmm, I was testing a wimax-type system for < big ISP > and walked past the modem that was sitting on my floor. My foot was all tingly for several hours after that. The instructions did say to keep the thing 18" away from you.

[Mike @ Jun 13th 2006 2:40AM]

The best test of course would be to tell people that the tower was switched off but keep it running. I'm sure that many people would claim to feel much better anyway.

The reverse would be even better, set up an antenna but don't switch it on yet. Again, compaints by people about bad sleep, headache etc. are practically guaranteed that way.

[Svart Anka @ Jun 13th 2006 2:48AM]

I too live in Sweden and I havn't seen anything about this in media. However, if it were to be true then it doesn't necessarily mean anything. The people living around the stations has propobly been notified about the activation, and because of the fact that Swedes are very hypochondriac, they will of course get sick immediately. There are all sorts of retarded BS diseases among folks with to much time and to little to do.

[Martin Sharp @ Jun 13th 2006 5:38AM]

Before you all debunk the report from Sweden, do you really think that ALL the people affected by the WiMax knew when the transmitter was being turned on? I don't think so.

Animals have shown symptoms when Mobile Phone Masts have been turned on, so the psychological theory is in no way the whole story.

As for Mr. "INVERSE SQUARE" above, true, but if transmitters didn't work over a wide area, then WiMax wouldn't work would it? If it was so weak in power the fast broadband would be intermittent, due to interference. And it isn't is it.

Also, we are talking EM spectrum here - ionising radiation blends into non-ionising radiation. There are no hard walls between the two. If you have ever fallen asleep in the sun you will note that the ultraviolet part of the same spectrum can be harmful.

Are technical people so naive that they believe that microwaves are completely inert? Just becuase they are not powerful enough to cook you several hundred metres away does not mean that they are completely harmless. To say that "It has never been shown to be dangerous in very small doses." is untrue. There are many studies showing that small amounts of exposure to microwaves comparable to GSM or WiMax do cause DNA damage (which can ultimately result in cancers) and short-term effects are comparable to mild radiation sickness, with classic symptoms as shown in Göten.

It is precisely the type of low-level but constant emissions from WiMax and Mobile Telephone Masts (aka Cell Towers or Base Stations) that cause "headaches, difficulty breathing, blurry vision" in the estimated 3-4% of the poulation who are electrosensitive (i.e. have EHS) and the suspected 30%+ who are slightly sensitive. If you are in the other 70% count yourself lucky, but do not inflict suffering on the sizeable minority who are affected through your ignorance. In a couple of years time as the damage accumulates cancer cases will be present too.

Isn't technology wonderful - and so nice to have the choice to live near it or not! WiMax - coming to your town whether you want it or not...

[Kyrie @ Sep 22nd 2008 1:39PM]

A big thank you to Martin Sharp for stating the obvious problems here. I resent all of the people who don't understand, or don't believe there could be problems, you will find out sooner or later that there are.

[Borre @ Jun 13th 2006 5:49AM]

I also live in Sweden, and I have heard this in media. It was quite big news a few months back... Have you lived under a rock or something?

[bluespacetiger @ Jun 13th 2006 7:58AM]

The word "placebo" comes to mind.

[Major Malfunction @ Jun 13th 2006 12:12PM]

Smoking cigarettes was once therapeutic too folks.

What we don't know will kill us. (duh duh DUH!)

[Tech^CF @ Jun 13th 2006 1:24PM]

To #4 Treqie

It was on Swedish TV the 23rd of May. I saw it today on svt.se - the program is called Debatt

[Derin K @ Jun 13th 2006 1:47PM]

I think I'd be much more happy living in a mountain

[Sgt Tinhat @ Jun 13th 2006 2:14PM]

Possibly where this first broke on the net:
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2067675/

If you speak Swedish, the May 23 edition of Debatt is still online for viewing (valid til Jun 21):
http://svt.se/svt/road/Classic/shared/mediacenter/index.jsp?d=40890&a=595780

A good springboard for finding out more on this electrical sensitivity stuff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_sensitivity

[ethana2 @ Mar 27th 2007 1:33AM]

I say we should kill all broadcasts and use smaller area networks. The internet is far superior to TV and radio, it's just a threat to business models of some rich people who have the power to prevent adoption using various tactics. Like alternative fuels and hybrids.

Imagine if your cells used wireless VoIP with scalable transmission energy output. I'd have my transmitter at home. 20 ft distance. I'd use it in my car. 2 ft distance with an external signal amplifier. Cleaner EM spectrum. I think it makes more sense. Too bad society only goes where the money is. We'll see what open source has done to that simple fact over the next 5 to ten years. (If there are any C++ OSS dev people out there, I could really use some help getting started- [e-mail])

Radio and TV broadcasts are just another form of light pollution and massive energy waste. And the ads can't be blocked with a simple Firefox plugin, either.