Last Updated: Sunday, 20 May 2007, 16:02 GMT 17:02
Wi-Fi: a warning signal
Britain is in the grip of a Wi-Fi revolution with offices, homes and classrooms going wireless - but there is concern the technology could carry health risks.
The Government insists Wi-Fi is safe, but a Panorama investigation shows that radio frequency radiation levels in some schools are up to three times the level found in the main beam of intensity from mobile phone masts.
Schools wi-fi health warning
Schools should be careful about installing wireless internet technology, according to a leading government advisor. Panorama: Wi-fi - A Warning Signal will be shown on BBC One at 20:30BST on 21 May.
Child warning over mobile phones
Parents should ensure their children use mobile phones only when absolutely necessary because of the potential health risks, an expert is warning.
The latest study by Sir William Stewart says there is still no proof mobile phones are unsafe, but warns precautionary steps should be taken.
Wi-Fi: Children at risk from 'electronic smog'
::: Revealed - radiation threat from new wireless computer networks
::: Teachers demand inquiry to protect a generation of pupils
By Geoffrey Lean, environment editor
Published: 22 April 2007
Britain's top health protection watchdog is pressing for a formal investigation into the hazards of using wireless communication networks in schools amid mounting concern that they may be damaging children's health, 'The Independent on Sunday' can reveal.
Sir William Stewart, the chairman of the Health Protection Agency, wants pupils to be monitored for ill effects from the networks - known as Wi-Fi - which emit radiation and are being installed in classrooms across the nation.(...)
From The Times
November 25, 2006
News in Brief
A Labour MP and distinguished cancer specialist called for a government inquiry into the potential health risks of wireless computer networks after The Times revealed that some schools were dismantling their equipment amid fears that it could be dangerous (Joanna Bale writes).
Ian Gibson, a former chairman of the Commons Science and Technology Committee, said: “We need a departmental inquiry into this situation. The Department of Health should be looking into it seriously. What we really need is another inquiry like the Stewart report into mobile phone masts.”
Dr Gibson is an honorary Professor and former Dean of the School of Biological Sciences at the University of East Anglia.
An Open Letter to Sir William Stewart of the Health Protection Agency by Guy J Kewney | posted on 24 April 2007
Professor Sir William Stewart Appointed Chairman of Cyclacel
DUNDEE - 23 September 1998 - Cyclacel, the cancer therapeutics company, announced today the appointment of Professor Sir William Stewart, FRS, FRSE, as Non-Executive Chairman. Sir William was Chief Scientific Adviser to the Prime Minister and the UK Government from 1990 to 1995. He is President of the BioIndustry Association, the UK biotechnology industry trade group, and Chairman of Dundee Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. He is a member of the Corporate Technology Board of SmithKline Beecham plc and a non-executive Director of the Water Research Centre plc. Sir William was a former Vice President of the Royal Society and was a member of the Scottish Committee of the Dearing Inquiry into Higher Education. He is currently an independent consultant on science, education and the environment.(...)
Further: google wifi william stewart here
Scientists reject Panorama's claims on Wi-Fi radiation risks
· Laptop and phone mast comparison is criticised
· Programme spokesman defends methodology
James Randerson, science correspondent
Monday May 21, 2007
An investigation into the possible dangers of Wi-Fi technology - wireless computer networks - by the BBC documentary programme Panorama has been rejected as "grossly unscientific" and a "scare story" by leading scientists. The programme will claim that the radiation given off by a Wi-Fi laptop is "three times higher than the ... signal strength of a typical phone mast". But the experiment carried out by the programme did not take into account a "basic" scientific concept and presented a bogus comparison, critics say.