rf warnings given

Quote:
DECT Cordless Baby Monitors - Offical warning on DECT phones: Alarms 'pose danger'
Sent by Sylvie:

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20...y_monitors.asp

News: 22/02/2006 - Digital Cordless Baby Monitors - Our Experiences

Summary: Over the past five years we, with the help of parents, have measured a variety of baby monitors and the DECT pulsing ones seem to be far more disruptive of the infantÿs sleep and state of contentment (causing restlessness, irritability and crying). The old wired ones and the older ´analogue¡ cordless ones do not seem to cause the same problems if kept at least one metre from the cot / bed.

We have had a number of reports from parents that their babies did not sleep well and cried a lot when they used DECT monitors but were ok when no baby monitor was used. When they then tried a cheaper analogue monitor, the infant then slept as well as they did with no monitor.

A DECT monitor places in your babyÿs bedroom will expose them to more pulsing microwave radiation that living near to a mobile phone base station mast would do. As a result, whilst there have been no studies done into baby monitors specifically, studies that cover mobile phone masts provide a good background to the effects that would be expected in your baby.

To find out more, we have a more detailed article in the subscriber part of this website (under Electrical Appliances).

Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=395

--------

DIGITAL BABY MONITORS 'RAISE RISK OF CANCER'
BY JAMES MILLS
20 February 2006
Daily Mail

(c) 2006 Associated Newspapers. All rights reserved

CHILDREN may be at risk of cancer from digital baby monitors, parents have been warned.

The cordless gadgets, which allow babies' breathing patterns to be checked from another room, emit potentially dangerous radio waves even when not in use.

Consumer group Powerwatch warned parents against using them after research suggested the technology increased the risk of brain tumours.

There are also fears it is linked with leukaemia, breast cancer, headaches and disturbed behaviour patterns in children.

Digitally enhanced cordless technology is becoming more popular in baby monitors. But Powerwatch founder, Alasdair Philips, said: 'This technology poses a risk to everyone, but babies in particular should not be exposed to it at all.

'Babies are more likely to be effected because their cells are rapidly dividing as they grow and can be more easily damaged.'

Similar concerns have been expressed about cordless phones.

Last week, research found those who used digital mobiles or cordless phones had a higher chance of getting a benign tumour called acoustic neuroma, though similar studies have found no link.

Dr Michael Clark, of the Health Protection Agency, said he would be surprised if digital baby monitors and base units of cordless phones caused cancer because their electromagnetic fields operate at low levels and the devices are not held against the head.


Headline:
Baby alarm; Exclusive Byline: Robbie Collin Source: News of the World Issue Date: Sunday February 19, 2006 Page: 39
PERIL: Alarms 'pose danger'
Story Text:

'Monitors give off deadly radiation'

BABIES are being put at risk of cancer by hi-tech cot monitors which emit deadly radiation, it is claimed.

Parents will be horrified to learn that slow-pulsing microwaves blasted out by modern digital equipment may cause leukaemia, say scientists.

Lab tests have also linked the radiation to potentially fatal brain tumours, breast cancer, headaches and disturbed behaviour patterns in kids.

Consumer group Powerwatch has urged parents to ditch digital (DECT) monitors.

Boss Alasdair Philips said: "We don't recommend they are used. Do not put a wireless transmitter in your child's bedroom and irradiate them unnecessarily."

Emissions, even if the monitor is not in use, can reportedly reach six volts per metre-TWICE as strong as those found within 100 metres of mobile phone masts.

That's a similar amount given off by digital cordless phones, as we revealed this month.

Baby monitoring mats-which check a tot's temperature and breathing-are also a concern because it is claimed they can emit 120 TIMES the safe level of 0.05 volts per metre.

Digital products produce the radiation-but are popular because they provide clearer sound than old analogue monitors.

Expert Dr David Dowson said: "Until more research has been done, I would advise every parent not to use them."

One manufacturer said: "There's no scientific evidence linking radiowaves to symptoms."

Omega this is not true. See under:
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wisse...+zu+Mobilfunk/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cancer+Cluster
http://www.buergerwelle.de/body_science.html

---

› See More: rf warnings given

"Lenny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Quote:
> DECT Cordless Baby Monitors - Offical warning on DECT phones: Alarms 'pose
> danger'
> Sent by Sylvie:
>
> http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20...y_monitors.asp
>
> News: 22/02/2006 - Digital Cordless Baby Monitors - Our Experiences
>
> Summary: Over the past five years we, with the help of parents, have
> measured a variety of baby monitors and the DECT pulsing ones seem to be
> far more disruptive of the infantÿs sleep and state of contentment
> (causing restlessness, irritability and crying). The old wired ones and
> the older ´analogue¡ cordless ones do not seem to cause the same problems
> if kept at least one metre from the cot / bed.
>
> We have had a number of reports from parents that their babies did not
> sleep well and cried a lot when they used DECT monitors but were ok when
> no > baby monitor was used. When they then tried a cheaper analogue
> monitor, the infant then slept as well as they did with no monitor.

Yet more cr@p from Lenny.
Where is the correct scientific method to determine if there was any effect
at all?
You won't find it because there is none.

I could "prove" almost anything if I go along to a group of people and ask
them the right question which is what has been done here.


Even in the Panorama report where they tested an electro sensitive she only
got it correct 65% of the time which is not good proof that she is
sensitive.
If she was electrosensitive then it would be ~100%

On 22 May 2007, Lenny <[email protected]> wrote:

<< SNIP >>

Welcome to my killfile. I can see this being possibly of interest in
u.t.m but there are many people who use no wireless kit at home and I
for one consider these threads OT in u.t.broadband Bye forever.

NoNeedToKnow wrote:

> Welcome to my killfile. I can see this being possibly of interest in
> u.t.m but there are many people who use no wireless kit at home and I
> for one consider these threads OT in u.t.broadband Bye forever.

Thanks for letting us all know, though.

Geoff

"Lenny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Quote:
> DECT Cordless Baby Monitors - Offical warning on DECT
> phones: Alarms 'pose danger'
> Sent by Sylvie:

Yawn......................................

Here we go again................


Ivor

"dennis@home" <[email protected]> writes:

[...]

> Even in the Panorama report where they tested an electro sensitive
> she only got it correct 65% of the time which is not good proof that
> she is sensitive.

I think they said "2/3 of the time".

And there were other people tested at the same time, but sadly their
results "were still being analysed". Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I
can't help feeling that's probably because their results weren't so
positive, and that overall it would be obvious to viewers that the
electro-sensitive people were doing no better than guessing.

> If she was electrosensitive then it would be ~100%

Not necessarily, I'd imagine. It might be a subtle sense of feeling
ill, or something. 2/3 doesn't sound impressive, though, especially
with other subjects tested at the same time with unreported results.