- cross-posted to:
- biophysics@mander.xyz
- beekeeping@mander.xyz
- veganism
- cross-posted to:
- biophysics@mander.xyz
- beekeeping@mander.xyz
- veganism
cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/7625705
According to the linked article, 72 studies suggest that wi-fi radiation harms/kills #bees – and by some claims is a threat to their continued existence. I suppose if extinction were really a likely risk there would be widespread outrage and bee conservationists taking actions. It seems there is a lack of chatter about this. This thread also somewhat implies disinterest in even having wi-fi alternatives.
In any case, does anyone think this is a battle worth fighting? Some possible off-the-cuff actions that come to mind:
- ban the sale of wi-fi devices bigger than a phone in Europe¹ if they do not also comply with these conditions:
- include an ethernet port as well. So e.g. macbooks would either have to bring back the ethernet port or nix wi-fi (and obviously Apple wouldn’t nix Wi-Fi).
- have a physical wi-fi toggle switch on the chassis (like Thinkpads have)
- force public libraries with Wi-Fi to give an ethernet port option so library users at least have the option of turning off their own wi-fi emissions.
- ban the sale of Wi-Fi APs that do not have:
- a configurable variable power setting that is easily tunable by the user; maybe even require a knob or slider on the chassis.
- bluetooth that is internet-capable
- force phones that include wi-fi to also include bluetooth as well as the programming to use bluetooth for internet. Bluetooth routers have existed for over a decade but they are quite rare… cannot be found in a common electronics shop.
Regarding bluetooth, it is much slower than wi-fi, lower range, and probably harder to secure. But nonetheless people should have this option for situations where they don’t need wi-fi capability. E.g. when a phone is just sitting idle it could turn off wi-fi and listen over bluetooth for notifications.
I suspect the 1st part of this quote from the article explains the lack of concern:
“The subject is uncomfortable for many of us because it interferes with our daily habits and there are powerful economic interests behind mobile communication technology.”
- I say /Europe/ because it’s perhaps the only place where enough people would be concerned and where you also have the greatest chance of passing pro-humanity legislation (no “Citizens United” that human needs have to compete with).
You must log in or # to comment.
I’ll need a little more information than BGR saying that some report in German says “WiFi is bad”.
I’ve been hearing that WiFi is the 4/5G is bad from the cranks for a while without any evidence. Perhaps they can pay for all the bees to get pointless copper bracelets?
I have to be honest OP, I kind of agree. The discussion, claims, and conclusions of the article are very broad spectrum.
WiFi runs on a variety of frequencies, and a variety of powers.
Microwave ovens also run on 2.4Ghz, and if you put a nucleus in a running microwave it would probably kill them all!
But that doesn’t necessarily mean that all microwave radiation in the world is at a dangerous level.WiFi runs on a variety of frequencies
Yes but the original 2.4Ghz is generally supported by all devices, from the oldest to the most recent.
and a variety of powers.
Not sure what you’re trying to imply here. Are you saying a variety of powers means everyone is ensuring they select a power that does not leave their building? You can simply war-drive down a city street to see the power levels in play are high enough to reach bees.
Microwave ovens also run on 2.4Ghz, and if you put a nucleus in a running microwave it would probably kill them all!
You are the 2nd person I’ve heard claim that microwave ovens are not only leaking on a sufficiently large scale in high numbers but that the leaks are notable enough to have significant range. Even if that’s true, you would have to also check whether the research neglected to control for that variable. Did you check that? Let’s suppose you did, and find that leaky ovens were not controlled for in the research. That would not rule out wi-fi (or mutually both) as a culprit - it would merely suggest that further investigation is needed to sort it out.
In honesty, it was more a comment on your post, and what your aim was in discussing it.
The review linked in the article proposes that wireless frequencies have some effect on insects.
It discusses EMF from power lines, the effects of GSM transmission amplified over normal levels, DECT, and touches very briefly on wifi.
The document makes reference to a second review towards the end by Isabel Wilke.
This review does involve wifi, however focusses almost entirely on mammals, rather than insects, and suggests studies that find low power transmission have no effect are being influenced by the industry that may be giving them funding.Your post linked to the article, then went on to propose solutions to remove wifi devices from daily life.
If you were confused by my reference to ovens, it was not implying that the results had been affected, more that the same band at extremely high power could be damaging just from heating effect (and that wifi is orders of magnitude less strong).
Your post linked to the article, then went on to propose solutions to remove wifi devices from daily life.
You seem to have misread my proposed actions. Nothing I proposed would remove wifi. Every proposal was merely to have alternatives which would be useful anyway, even if the bee research turns out to be bogus. I would not propose removal of wi-fi until the research reaches a stage where the evidence solidly explains what is happening at a cellular level.
some report in German says “WiFi is bad”.… I’ve been hearing that WiFi is the 4/5G is bad from the cranks for a while without any evidence.
I’m struggling to parse that sentence but the “without any evidence” claim seems to be what you’ve arrived at on the basis that you cannot read German. Did you at least chase up the references starting on page 18?
Perhaps they can pay for all the bees to get pointless copper bracelets?
To say tracking bees is pointless calls into question whether you accept the simple claim that bee populations are shrinking. If you don’t at least accept that much, then indeed I can see why you oppose any research that would interfere with your apparently strong attachment to wi-fi.
To say tracking bees is pointless calls into question whether you accept the simple claim that bee populations are shrinking.
I said that people who claim that WiFi causes cancer, and breaks down bee populations overlaps with the people who get copper bracelets to align their chackras.
Who the hell keeps WiFi routers with their bee hives?
The chances that WiFi is causing these problems rather than the pesticides is slim.
Oh boy is that a complete shit show!
Against my better judgement I took a look at page 18.
It’s 5G that’s causing the problems! No its GSM 900Mhz!
Let’s just call it WiFi!
So it’s 5G that’s causing the problems (look how I predicted that already) but bees are impacted in locations where 5G isn’t deployed?
For a scientific paper, it mixes terms and confuses technologies which is a massive red flag. Radio and TV and very close in the spectrum, are they not impacted? Where is the cut off point where the different types of radio waves? Or are they claiming it is all bad? If they are then we are already fucked because light is just a slightly different frequency.
No there is no evidence from this travesty of a “paper”. However there is already a long relationship with modern farming techniques, pesticides and bee issues. Rather than having a complete wank over a conspiracy theory, why don’t you put your efforts into something that has better scientific backing.
