- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

looking for a English course running next year in SL or in 3D Virtual World
by Wang Airong 05 Dec '11

05 Dec '11

Hi all, I am a Ph.D. Candidate in Sweden majoring in subject didactics. I am looking for an English course running in Second Life or in another 3D virtual world to collect data for my doctoral thesis. I am very appreciated that if you know a course of this kind, you would like to share some information with me. Thanks! Best, Airong Wang

3 3

wireless (1 of 3a)
by jcu 05 Dec '11

05 Dec '11

Hello, Is anyone researching harmful effects of wireless in public domains (esp. in close proximity to chiidren)? joan s. ont. On 2011-11-30, at 10:41 PM, jcu wrote: > Warnings against Wireless Technology > http://emfjournal.com/cell-phone-ban/ > http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1565565&page=2 > > Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology > > > -- American Bird Conservancy and Forest Conservation Council: Brought a lawsuit against the FCC because millions of migratory birds are being disoriented by microwave radiation and crashing into cell towers > > -- Amateur Radio Relay League Bio-Effects Committee: **The FCC's standard does not protect against non-thermal effects.** > > -- Australian Democrats: The **explosion in wireless communications technology** is causing widespread illness. > -- Austrian Medical Association: Warns against Wi-Fi, cordless phones, and cell phone use by children. > > -- Ballinderry Primary School, Ireland: Removed Wi-Fi to protect the children. > > -- Bavaria, Germany: Recommends no Wi-Fi in schools. > > -- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): The FCC's exposure standards are **seriously flawed.** > > -- European Environmental Agency: Recommends wireless technology be avoided by vulnerable groups such as children. > > -- Food and Drug Administration (FDA): The FCC's exposure standard **does not address the issue of long-term, chronic exposure to RF fields.** > > -- Frankfurt, Germany: Bans Wi-Fi in public schools. > > -- Interdisciplinary Society for Environmental Medicine (3000 physicians in Germany): Recommends banning cell phone use by children and banning cell phones and cordless phones in preschools, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, events halls, public buildings and vehicles. > -- International Association of Fire Fighters: Opposes communication antennas on fire stations. > > -- International Commission on Electromagnetic Safety (comprised of scientists from 16 nations): Recommends limiting cell phone use by children, teenagers, pregnant women and the elderly. > > -- Irish Doctors Environmental Association: Warns that current safety guidelines are **not appropriate.** > > -- Karnataka State, India: Bans cell phones in all schools and pre-university colleges. > > -- Knowsley, Borough of, England: Bans cell phones in schools. > > -- Lakehead University, Ontario: Bans Wi-Fi on campus >

3 3

Panel on Representations of the Internet in Popular Culture
by Delia Dumitrica 05 Dec '11

05 Dec '11

Looking for panelists for a CSA Panel on Representations of the Internet in Popular Culture. If interested, please email me off list. Representations of the Internet in Popular Culture, Canadian Sociological Association Annual Conference 2012, Wilfrid Laurier University / University of Waterloo, May 29, 2012 June 2, 2012 Topic Area: Sociology of Technology Session Description: This session seeks to explore the different discourses through which the internet is being constructed as a space of possibilities, creativity, as well as danger in popular culture. The internet is approached here as a socio-technical assemblage where different actors are involved in a struggle over its meaning, future articulations and social functions. Stepping away from an interest in simply defining the internet in terms of its technical aspects, this session is interested in recuperating the internet as both a social space and a tool for social action. From showcasing the 'World of Warcraft' on the TV series The Big Bang Theory to personifying 'the Net' as a conscious being in Robert Sawyer's Wake trilogy, popular constructions of the internet as a space for social action or as an actor pushing for a particular future for human beings should be understood as sites where contemporary ideologies, social forces and material capabilities become articulated together. This session invites papers dealing with the discourses through which the internet is being understood, discussed and popularized in movies, novels, TV shows, music videoclips, commercials, biographies, exhibitions etc. Abstracts (100 200 words) must be submitted using the CSA online conference system http://www.csa-scs.ca/submissions by January 30, 2012. Presentations will be confirmed by February 15, 2012 For further inquiries about the panel, please contact Dr. Delia Dumitrica, University of Calgary, dddumitr(a)ucalgary.ca Delia Dumitrica, PhD Instructor Department of Communication and Culture University of Calgary

1 0

Re: [Air-L] [ciresearchers] regarding mobile devices and cancer: M4D and IARC
by M.B.Gaved 05 Dec '11

05 Dec '11

Hi All I’d also welcome reading further about the debate surrounding mobile devices and effects of radio emissions. As some of you know my PhD territory was an exploration of grassroots community networking groups, including those using wireless technologies, so I have both an academic and very personal interest, having spent a lot of time clambering around roofs mounting equipment and working with it! [1]. I apologise if I gave the impression of bias by posting up the Lancet report: Robert flagged up the IARC was carrying out some research and Gene forwarded to ci-researchers, I found the outcome of the study and thought it might be of interest to post the reference, quickly summarise and give you the link so you would all to be able to read further yourself. I’d also be interested in reading further around the topic, please post up further links folks. I’m very interested to hear about where people have appropriated communications infrastructures for their own usage and their perceptions of the risks versus the benefits. Regards to you all Mark [1] PhD link: http://oro.open.ac.uk/29696/ "An investigation into grassroots initiated networked communities as a means of addressing the digital divide" From: Don Cameron [mailto:dg_cameron@bigpond.com] Sent: 04 December 2011 23:27 To: ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net; 'Robert Rattle'; 'gene loeb'; 'M.B.Gaved' Cc: air-l(a)aoir.org Subject: RE: [ciresearchers] Re: [Air-L] regarding mobile devices and cancer: M4D and IARC I was also struck by what seems a rather draconian term of reference for ‘evidence’ in this study. CQU (.au) faces a similar underlying dilemma (to studies questioning the promoted “safety” of mobile phone radiation) through the recent offering of Bachelor of Science (Chiropractic) curriculum. Some apparent old-school scholars cite a lack of evidence-based research to support such curriculum arguing Chiropractics is not evidence based; others argue the evidence is sound, well documented and practiced. Difference of opinion seems to lack consideration of benefit to humanity rather focusing only on the definition of evidence itself. Perhaps lost in this somewhat academic war of interpretation is a little old fashioned common sense? When considering the well-being of loved ones in potential conflict with the mission of corporate telecommunications interests might it not be prudent to err on the side of caution? Should we not be seeking evidence to support a stance of safety rather than risk? The question IMO should not be one of “is mobile radiation safe”; it should be “what evidence exists to support argument that mobile radiation is not as dangerous as we know it to be?“ Don From: ciresearchers-owner(a)vancouvercommunity.net [mailto:ciresearchers-owner@vancouvercommunity.net] On Behalf Of Robert Rattle Sent: Monday, 5 December 2011 6:26 AM To: 'ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net'; 'gene loeb'; M.B.Gaved Cc: 'air-l(a)aoir.org' Subject: [ciresearchers] Re: [Air-L] regarding mobile devices and cancer: M4D and IARC Thanks for this reference Mark. I was rather struck by the quote you provided as it could be interpreted to be conflicting with the official stated classification in Group 2B (Possibly carcinogenic to humans) of radiofrequency EMR by the IARC. Upon reading the article, however, and re-reading the quote you provided, it is clear that both reinforce the categorisation in Group 2B by the IARC. For instance, the INTERPHONE and Swedish studies referred to in the Lancet article states that "the Working Group concluded that the findings [of these studies] could not be dismissed as reflecting bias alone, and that a causal interpretation between mobile phone RF-EMF exposure and glioma is possible." Several additional conclusions reached as discussed in the Lancet article also makes clear the basis for, and strengthening further the case for including radiofrequency EMR in Group 2B. As the article concludes: "the Working Group classified RF EMF as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B). This evaluation was supported by a large majority of Working Group members." So, what are the moral, legal, ethical and health (and environmental) implications, especially regarding those least able to cope with or manage the impacts and costs? Anyone investigating these issues? --- On Mon, 11/28/11, M.B.Gaved <m.b.gaved(a)open.ac.uk> wrote: From: M.B.Gaved <m.b.gaved(a)open.ac.uk> Subject: [Air-L] regarding mobile devices and cancer: M4D and IARC To: "'ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net'" <ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net>, "'gene loeb'" <geneloeb(a)gmail.com> Cc: "'air-l(a)aoir.org'" <air-l(a)aoir.org> Received: Monday, November 28, 2011, 5:42 AM Regarding research on possible carcinogenic effects of mobile phone use on humans, and ethical issues as a result - The results of the IARC working group are published in July 2011's edition of "Lancet Oncology" - it looks like they view the evidence (of mobile phone usage being carinogenic) as being inconclusive, and limited evidence being available: ".the Working Group reached the overall conclusion that these results provided only weak mechanistic evidence relevant to RF-EMF-induced cancer in humans.". See: Robert Baan, Yann Grosse, Béatrice Lauby-Secretan, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Véronique Bouvard, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha, Farhad Islami, Laurent Galichet, Kurt Straif, on behalf of the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph Working Group, Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, The Lancet Oncology, Volume 12, Issue 7, July 2011, Pages 624-626, ISSN 1470-2045, 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70147-4. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470204511701474) Kind regards Mark Gaved Research Associate www.xdelia.org The Open University Milton Keynes UK From: gene loeb [mailto:geneloeb@gmail.com] Sent: 25 November 2011 09:49 To: ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net Subject: [ciresearchers] Fwd: [Air-L] M4D and IARC Here is a good question for consideration by some in our group. Gene ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Robert Rattle <robert14robert(a)yahoo.ca> Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM Subject: [Air-L] M4D and IARC To: air-l(a)aoir.org I hope I'm not opening up a can of endangered worms with this question... Given the recent announcement by the IARC concerning the possible carcinogenic effects of radiofrequency radiation, is anyone aware of any ethical, health or similar discussions concerning possible implications from the use of mobile technologies (M4D) in emerging economy countries? Similarly, is anyone aware of any human/universal rights, legal, moral, health, or ethical dialogue concerning the unwanted and increased ubiquity of exposure to radiofrequency emissions (in either emerging or advanced economy countries)? R _______________________________________________ The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). _______________________________________________ The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

1 0

2012 Participatory Innovation Conference - Melbourne, Australia
by Ken Friedman 05 Dec '11

05 Dec '11

Dear Colleagues, This January 12-14, Swinburne University and SPIRE at Southern Danish University join to host the 2012 Participatory Innovation Conference in Melbourne, Australia. This is a great opportunity for those interested in co-creation and participatory design. I'd be grateful if you would share this with colleagues at your university. Best regards, Ken Professor Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS University Distinguished Professor Dean, Faculty of Design Swinburne University of Technology -- Why should you attend the 2012 Participatory Innovation Conference http://www.pin-c2012.org in Melbourne, Australia, the 12-14 of January? (Even if you are not presenting.)* The HOW of including diverse stakeholders into your innovation processes is more challenging than ever. Crowd-sourcing, open digital platforms, peer panels, dialogue circles are some of the potential ways in which internal and external stakeholders can be brought into the innovation process. But how do you include them in ways that are respectful, equitable, democratic, effective, value-adding, and fun? You will learn how at PIN-C 2012 through five distinct tracks on Indigenous Knowledge and Cultural Innovation, Evolving Design Anthropology, Making Design and Analysing Interaction, Organising Participatory Innovation, and Designing Innovative Business Models. But that’s not all. PIN-C 2012 is an investment in designing your organisation’s future. In the future, businesses, governments, and community organisations will require greater participation of more diverse people into decision-making processes. At PIN-C 2012, you will be gain access to cutting-edge practical and theoretical tools to design participatory innovation processes that will suit your organisation and its many stakeholders for years to come. PIN-C 2012 is a great value. It offers two and half days of exciting programming, including five international keynotes, over 60 'dialogue-starter' presentations, workshops, and interactive exercises; inclusive breakfast and lunches, free Lilydale, VIC hotel and train station shuttle bus, networking opportunities, all included in your ticket price. PIN-C 2012 is an exceptional global event. Co-hosts Swinburne Faculty of Design http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/ and SPIRE http://www.sdu.dk/om_sdu/institutter_centre/c_spire?sc_lang=en University of Southern Denmark, are global educational institutions that know how to make academic research relevant to design and business. With participants from all over the world, you will share ideas with the best participatory innovation thinkers and doers from Australia, Brazil, China, Denmark, Finland, India, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, UK, and USA. You’ll meet amazingly diverse groups of people. No where else, but at PIN-C 2012, will you ever have the opportunity to network with indigenous activists, design anthropologists, designers, interaction analysts, business managers, futurists, and entrepreneurs—all united by a passion for participatory innovation. So are you convinced to join us at PIN-C 2012? Don’t wait a minute longer as there are spaces for only 30 participants per track, visit the PIN-C 2012 website at www.pin-c2012.org and register today. Dori Tunstall and Jacob Buur, PIN-C 2012 Co-Chairs *Format of message provided by 2011 AIGA Conference PIVOT. Thanks AIGA!

1 0

Re: [Air-L] regarding mobile devices and cancer: M4D and IARC
by Robert Rattle 04 Dec '11

04 Dec '11

Thanks for this reference Mark. I was rather struck by the quote you provided as it could be interpreted to be conflicting with the official stated classification in Group 2B (Possibly carcinogenic to humans) of radiofrequency EMR by the IARC. Upon reading the article, however, and re-reading the quote you provided, it is clear that both reinforce the categorisation in Group 2B by the IARC. For instance, the INTERPHONE and Swedish studies referred to in the Lancet article states that "the Working Group concluded that the findings [of these studies] could not be dismissed as reflecting bias alone, and that a causal interpretation between mobile phone RF-EMF exposure and glioma is possible." Several additional conclusions reached as discussed in the Lancet article also makes clear the basis for, and strengthening further the case for including radiofrequency EMR in Group 2B. As the article concludes: "the Working Group classified RF EMF as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B). This evaluation was supported by a large majority of Working Group members." So, what are the moral, legal, ethical and health (and environmental) implications, especially regarding those least able to cope with or manage the impacts and costs? Anyone investigating these issues? --- On Mon, 11/28/11, M.B.Gaved <m.b.gaved(a)open.ac.uk> wrote: From: M.B.Gaved <m.b.gaved(a)open.ac.uk> Subject: [Air-L] regarding mobile devices and cancer: M4D and IARC To: "'ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net'" <ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net>, "'gene loeb'" <geneloeb(a)gmail.com> Cc: "'air-l(a)aoir.org'" <air-l(a)aoir.org> Received: Monday, November 28, 2011, 5:42 AM Regarding research on possible carcinogenic effects of mobile phone use on humans, and ethical issues as a result - The results of the IARC working group are published in July 2011's edition of "Lancet Oncology" - it looks like they view the evidence (of mobile phone usage being carinogenic) as being inconclusive, and limited evidence being available: ".the Working Group reached the overall conclusion that these results provided only weak mechanistic evidence relevant to RF-EMF-induced cancer in humans.". See: Robert Baan, Yann Grosse, Béatrice Lauby-Secretan, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Véronique Bouvard, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha, Farhad Islami, Laurent Galichet, Kurt Straif, on behalf of the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph Working Group, Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, The Lancet Oncology, Volume 12, Issue 7, July 2011, Pages 624-626, ISSN 1470-2045, 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70147-4. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470204511701474) Kind regards Mark Gaved Research Associate www.xdelia.org The Open University Milton Keynes UK From: gene loeb [mailto:geneloeb@gmail.com] Sent: 25 November 2011 09:49 To: ciresearchers(a)vancouvercommunity.net Subject: [ciresearchers] Fwd: [Air-L] M4D and IARC Here is a good question for consideration by some in our group. Gene ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Robert Rattle <robert14robert(a)yahoo.ca> Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM Subject: [Air-L] M4D and IARC To: air-l(a)aoir.org I hope I'm not opening up a can of endangered worms with this question... Given the recent announcement by the IARC concerning the possible carcinogenic effects of radiofrequency radiation, is anyone aware of any ethical, health or similar discussions concerning possible implications from the use of mobile technologies (M4D) in emerging economy countries? Similarly, is anyone aware of any human/universal rights, legal, moral, health, or ethical dialogue concerning the unwanted and increased ubiquity of exposure to radiofrequency emissions (in either emerging or advanced economy countries)? R _______________________________________________ The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). _______________________________________________ The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

1 0

Re: [Air-L] wireless (1 of 3a)
by jcu 04 Dec '11

04 Dec '11

Yes, of course. Good advice. Some of my sources come from an online discussion group for people with multiple chemical sensitivities (MCS). I can't quote from individual posts unless I get permission from participants, but I can share their webpage. One would have to become a member to access their archives and files. To visit this group on the web, here is a link. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MCS-Canada/ If you read numerous posts in their archives, you'd get a sense of their sensitivities to various environmental exposures. I also would never encourage cell phone use in young children. Research or not, that's common sense. Apologies for the format for my last 4 emails. And thank you for your thoughts on this, joan On 2011-12-04, at 1:01 PM, Han-Teng Liao wrote: > Hi, Joan, > > Do you mind providing just the link and not sending all the > materials in separate different emails to the mailing list, please? > > If you do some Web/library search, you should be able to find some > statements and factsheets by the WHO and one IEEE human exposure > standard. These documents should take you to other scientific > research on that matter, since many of them will cite these documents. > > Not all electric and magnetic fields are the same ( > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum ). > > Also, institutions ban wireless sometimes out of different reasons > instead of health risk (e.g. students using cellphone as distraction > from lectures, etc.) > > Thus, you may want to define specifically what kind of electric > and magnetic fields and what kind of devices. Otherwise if one is > simply paranoid about wireless technologies, then s/he may want to > reconsider using Iron, refrigerator, toaster, hair dryer, etc. > > For example, I would agree that microwave meals are not really > healthy compared to other freshly cooked meals, but that is because of > factors other than electric and magnetic fields (bad life styles, more > likely to contain artificial stuff, not fresh food, lonely eating > habits, typical PhD student life >< ). > > Good luck searching for the WHO and IEEE information. Enjoy. > Best, > hanteng > > > > On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 2:20 PM, jcu <jcu(a)execulink.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Is anyone researching harmful effects of wireless in public domains (esp. in >> close proximity to chiidren)? >> >> joan >> s. ont. >> >> On 2011-11-30, at 10:41 PM, jcu wrote: >> >>> Warnings against Wireless Technology >>> http://emfjournal.com/cell-phone-ban/ >>> http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1565565&page=2 >>> >>> Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology >>> >>> >>> -- American Bird Conservancy and Forest Conservation Council: Brought a lawsuit against the FCC because millions of migratory birds are being disoriented by microwave radiation and crashing into cell towers >>> >>> -- Amateur Radio Relay League Bio-Effects Committee: **The FCC's standard does not protect against non-thermal effects.** >>> >>> -- Australian Democrats: The **explosion in wireless communications technology** is causing widespread illness. >>> -- Austrian Medical Association: Warns against Wi-Fi, cordless phones, and cell phone use by children. >>> >>> -- Ballinderry Primary School, Ireland: Removed Wi-Fi to protect the children. >>> >>> -- Bavaria, Germany: Recommends no Wi-Fi in schools. >>> >>> -- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): The FCC's exposure standards are **seriously flawed.** >>> >>> -- European Environmental Agency: Recommends wireless technology be avoided by vulnerable groups such as children. >>> >>> -- Food and Drug Administration (FDA): The FCC's exposure standard **does not address the issue of long-term, chronic exposure to RF fields.** >>> >>> -- Frankfurt, Germany: Bans Wi-Fi in public schools. >>> >>> -- Interdisciplinary Society for Environmental Medicine (3000 physicians in Germany): Recommends banning cell phone use by children and banning cell phones and cordless phones in preschools, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, events halls, public buildings and vehicles. >>> -- International Association of Fire Fighters: Opposes communication antennas on fire stations. >>> >>> -- International Commission on Electromagnetic Safety (comprised of scientists from 16 nations): Recommends limiting cell phone use by children, teenagers, pregnant women and the elderly. >>> >>> -- Irish Doctors Environmental Association: Warns that current safety guidelines are **not appropriate.** >>> >>> -- Karnataka State, India: Bans cell phones in all schools and pre-university colleges. >>> >>> -- Knowsley, Borough of, England: Bans cell phones in schools. >>> >>> -- Lakehead University, Ontario: Bans Wi-Fi on campus >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/

1 0

wireless (1 of 3 cont)
by jcu 04 Dec '11

04 Dec '11

Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology (con't) ... > -- Madhya Pradesh, India: Bans cell phones in schools by both students and teachers. > > -- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH): The FCC's standard is inadequate because it "is based on only one dominant mechanism—adverse health effects caused by body heating." > > -- National Library of France: Removed Wi-Fi and installed only cable connections. > > -- Paris, France: Removed Wi-Fi from four libraries. > > -- Prebandal Preparatory School, Chichester, England: Removed Wi-Fi from its campus > > -- Progressive Librarians Guild: Recommends no wireless technology in libraries. > > -- Russian National Committee for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Warns that cell phones are unsafe even for short conversations. Children under 16, pregnant women, epileptics, and people with memory loss, sleep disorders and neurological diseases should never use cell phones. > > -- Sainte-Geneviève University, Paris: Removed Wi-Fi from its library. > > -- Salzburg, Austria: Bans Wi-Fi in public schools. > > -- Sebastopol, California: Broke its contract to install citywide Wi-Fi. > > -- Stowe School, Buckinghamshire, England: Removed Wi-Fi from campus. > > -- Therold, Ontario: Broke its contract to install citywide Wi-Fi. > > -- UK Department of Education: Children under 16 should not use cell phones except in an emergency. > > -- University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute: Children should never use a cell phone except in an emergency. > > -- Voice (UK Teachers Union): Calls for a ban on Wi-Fi in schools. > > -- Ysgol Pantycelyn School, Carmarthenshirem, Wales: Removed Wi-Fi from campus. > >

1 0

Re: [Air-L] wireless in question (3 of 3)
by jcu 04 Dec '11

04 Dec '11

> > Countries ban use of cell phones by Children > > > * · India - No use in children under 16 years of age (also it is an illegal offense for an expecting Mother to use the cell phone) > > * · Israel - No use in children under 12 years of age > > * · Russia - General limitation; no use under 12 years > > * · France - No long calls, no use under 16, banning of advertising to children under 12, mandatory earphones with all cell phones > > * · Japan - General limitation under 18 years of age > > * · Tajikistan – in Central Asia bans mobile phones from schools and Universities (11MAR09) to boost education. If caught carrying or talking on a cell phone, they will be fined. > > * · United Kingdom – General limitation under 12 years of age > > * · Toronto*s public health department has recommended children under eight should use a cell phone only in emergencies. > > * · Health warnings for children and the use of WiFi in the classroom have also recently arisen out of Germany. > > * · Dr. Devra Davis, Healthy Child Advisory Board Member and Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA quotes: > Last year, 46% of US children aged 8-12 used cell phones. Children under the age of 12 should not use cell phones unless in an emergency situation. If they must use cell phones, make sure they connect using a headset. > > > __._,_.___ >

1 0

Re: [Air-L] wireless in question (2 of 3)
by jcu 04 Dec '11

04 Dec '11

DOCTORS AND SCIENTISTS CALLING FOR STRICTER REGULATION AND/OR A MORATORIUM ON WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY Vienna Resolution 1998 Salzburg Resolution 2000 Declaration of Alcalá 2002 Catania Resolution 2002 Freiburger Appeal 2002 Bamberger Appeal 2004 Maintaler Appeal 2004 Coburger Appeal 2005 Oberammergauer Appeal 2005 Haibacher Appeal 2005 Pfarrkirchener Appeal 2005 Freienbacher Appeal 2005 Lichtenfelser Appeal 2005 Hofer Appeal 2005 Stockacher Appeal 2005 Helsinki Appeal 2005 Benevento Resolution 2006 Allgäuer Appeal 2006 WiMax Appeal 2006 Appeal of March 23, 2007 Brussels Appeal 2007 Venice Resolution 2008 London Resolution 2007

1 0