There have been double-blind tests performed, but the subjects were quite upset when they learned that apparently it wasn't the wifi signals making them sick, but the blinking lights on the wireless devices.
IE lights disabled, radios fully enabled, on highest power, transmitting data: No symptoms. Simulated status light activity, radios completely disabled and unpowered: symptoms. Lights & radio on : symptoms Lights & radio disabled: no symptoms.
Conclusion: Clearly we need to investigate the status l
"Double blind" in this experiment would mean neither the subjects nor the observers would know whether the radio was on or off. Clearly everyone would know whether the lights were on or not. And yeah, one one level it's trying to mislead people to see whether it's the radio or their perception of the radio which is causing the problem. I doubt anyone is suggesting blinking LEDs actually cause the problem (dear God, I hope not).
I doubt anyone is suggesting blinking LEDs actually cause the problem (dear God, I hope not).
The LEDs can make the people imagine that there are "harmful electromagnetic waves" present. Thus, the LEDs would actually cause the problem, but mentally.
Solution: make devices with just a simple power LED in concealment somewhere back of the device, or allow the blinking LEDs to be toggled on/off.
It is also the new tinfoil, and can protect you from wifi radiation! lmao
Cardboard can also filter the radiation. Just put the wifi into a cardboard box, make sure it is completely sealed so you can't see it from any angle, and visitors experiencing wifi exposure symptoms can receive substantial relief. Just don't tell them that the radiation it is filtering is the visible light from the L
You had mail, but the super-user read it, and deleted it!
What does Science have to say about this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
There have been double-blind tests performed, but the subjects were quite upset when they learned that apparently it wasn't the wifi signals making them sick, but the blinking lights on the wireless devices.
IE lights disabled, radios fully enabled, on highest power, transmitting data: No symptoms.
Simulated status light activity, radios completely disabled and unpowered: symptoms.
Lights & radio on : symptoms
Lights & radio disabled: no symptoms.
Conclusion: Clearly we need to investigate the status l
Re: (Score:1)
What kind of double blind test is that? It seems deliberately misleading, which would seem to me to be the opposite of a blind test.
Re: (Score:0)
"Double blind" in this experiment would mean neither the subjects nor the observers would know whether the radio was on or off. Clearly everyone would know whether the lights were on or not. And yeah, one one level it's trying to mislead people to see whether it's the radio or their perception of the radio which is causing the problem. I doubt anyone is suggesting blinking LEDs actually cause the problem (dear God, I hope not).
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt anyone is suggesting blinking LEDs actually cause the problem (dear God, I hope not).
The LEDs can make the people imagine that there are "harmful electromagnetic waves" present. Thus, the LEDs would actually cause the problem, but mentally.
Solution: make devices with just a simple power LED in concealment somewhere back of the device, or allow the blinking LEDs to be toggled on/off.
Re:What does Science have to say about this? (Score:3)
Or electrical tape works...
Re: (Score:2)
Electrical tape is not just to cover your data and protect it from prying eyes anymore.
http://it.slashdot.org/story/0... [slashdot.org]
It is also the new tinfoil, and can protect you from wifi radiation! lmao
Cardboard can also filter the radiation. Just put the wifi into a cardboard box, make sure it is completely sealed so you can't see it from any angle, and visitors experiencing wifi exposure symptoms can receive substantial relief. Just don't tell them that the radiation it is filtering is the visible light from the L