Coke machines in SA to dispense free Wi-Fi - TechCentral

Coke machines in SA to dispense free Wi-Fi

coke-640

South African consumers will soon be able to quench their thirst and check their e-mail at the same time. Coca-Cola and BT Global Services have announced plans to offer free Wi-Fi Internet access in impoverished communities using Coke’s vending machines.

BT – formerly British Telecom – will provide connectivity, support and business training as part of the roll-out.

The pilot project has been launched in the rural Eastern Cape and in rural Mpumalanga.

Sites were chosen for their accessibility to local communities, the companies said.

The first site is at the Sasol Integrated Energy Centre in Qunu, near Mtata. “This is a popular spot for locals and is in close proximity to a taxi rank, attracting large numbers of people,” they said. The centre is managed by a predominantly female co-operative, which will benefit from the increased flow of people.

The second site is located at Thokozane Fast Food situated in Bushbuckridge.

Both outlets are in the vicinity of shopping centres and schools.

Internet access is offered for free via Wi-Fi without any purchase requirement of any kind and is accessible for the duration of the time spent at the outlets.

The companies intend to install “Wi-Fi coolers” in various parts of South Africa over time.

Coca-Cola South Africa chief information officer David Visser said that providing access to free Wi-Fi will allow students and schoolchildren to “increase their knowledge through research while also giving entrepreneurs and small business owners in the community the opportunity to manage some of their business aspects online”.  — © 2014 NewsCentral Media

82 Comments

  1. So now Coke find a way to get the school goer to come to the advertising!
    After much lobbying, Coke reluctantly agreed not to advertise near schools (Existing advertising still remains in place). From David Visser’s comment above one can see just who is targeted in this project. Hopefully the students can research the ill effects of the Coca Cola product line up while using the free service.

  2. great idea … hope they maintain some sort of service levels to ensure the service is reliable and available.

  3. Lindi Boonzaier on

    Wifi is TOXIC! Wifi gives many people headaches, high blood pressure, skin rashes and eventually cancer. Sufferers just do not know wifi is causing their health problems until
    its too late.

  4. Greg Mahlknecht on

    Wifi doesn’t actually do that, but the sun does. Let’s all live in underground tunnels.

  5. Yeah, this isn’t even remotely true.

    What causes people like this to think that their completely unsubstantiated nonsense is just as good as actual, real information?

  6. Ah but even there you’re not safe, because tunnels have terrible ventilation, and if you install air handlers that require power, that generates EM fields which are also lethal.

  7. Every post you have made seems to be about the “health risks” of WiFi, why does it bother you so much when there is no scientific evidence or reasoning behind this. WiFi works on a very low power (really, really low power) frequency of 2.4GHz typically. This is similar to that used by Microwaves (though much less powerful than what you would get from standing next to a shielded microwave), cell towers, cordless phones, car alarms, bluetooth and more. It seems to me you are pulling rubbish out from nowhere, this isn’t a ionising wavelength – just a microwave electromagnetic wave. If you ever did secondary school level science you will know that it’s not a threat.

  8. You’re not gonna win this one, oscarandjo – she’s trying to profit from this wi-fi paranoia she thinks she’s creating (on techcentral of all places) by selling nets designed to block radio traffic: whyfry.co.za

  9. You are LYING, and you know it. You are a commercial provider of “wifi” nets, so you try to sow fear. Here’s your website. whyfry.co.za How much money are you generating by causing FEAR, lindi? In fact, you are running a business that USES WiFI to sell things, aren’t you? You should be ashamed of yourself!

  10. People like Lindi don’t listen to reason or intimidation – if anything, calling them out is turned into ‘persecution’, and they get stronger and more belligerent in the face of it. Just ignore them.

  11. cooked in the head.

    Looks like your brain is already fried. Forgot to wear your tinfoil hat?

  12. Lindi,pls visit https://www.facebook.com/emrareusafeSA.People just do not know,it is not their fault.It not only affects humans and animals,it is dangerous to bees(colony collapse disorder)see:Dr Magda Havis.It affects bird (stuffs up their navigation),butterflies,even the common tadpole.It affects forests,vegetation.Have you signed Prof Olle Johansson’s petiton yet?

  13. oscarandjo:please educate yourself and go and do some research before making statements like this.

  14. I also sell radiation protective products,and i am proud of it.I have a great idea,why don’t you go an buy an iPhone6 immediately,and make sure there is unwired wi-fi in your office and your children’s school.Please include some unwired laptops,i-pads,computers.Rush off now,i assure you there is no danger-all is well.

  15. faze i also sell radiation protection products and am proud of it.Intelligent people are very interested in this subject.Maybe you should Google some non-industry funded research?Bioinitiative Report ringing any bells?

  16. I am very proud of Lindi for having the courage to speak out about this.Do you know what creates fear?ignorance

  17. Why was the comment i posted right at the beginning removed?I would like the CEO of Coke to respond to our concerns asap.

  18. Avi-i do not have a problem with it either,i just want them to use wired internet and not wireless.Maybe they can use this opportunity to educate the kids about the dangers of electromagnetic radiation and wireless technologies.

  19. Martin Blank, Ph.D., College
    of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University

    “As a researcher on biological effects of electromagnetic
    fields (EMF) for over twenty five years, as well as one of the contributors to
    the 2007 and 2012 Bioinitiative Reports, I am writing to you concerning the health risks associated
    with the radiation from WiFi and to urge you not to install WiFi in the schools
    in your district.”

    “RF radiation can cause single and double strand DNA
    breaks at exposure levels that are currently considered safe under the FCC
    guidelines. There are also epidemiological studies that show an increased risk
    of cancers associated with exposure to RF.”

  20. “RF has been shown to cause other potentially harmful
    biological effects, such as leakage of the blood brain barrier that can lead to
    damage of neurons in the brain, increased micronuclei (DNA fragments) in human
    blood lymphocytes–all at RF exposures that are well below the limits in the current
    FCC guidelines.“Martin Blank, Ph.D., College
    of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University

  21. It is essential, for the
    protection of ourselves and our children, to take a precautionary approach and
    not install a WiFi system.”Martin Blank, Ph.D., College
    of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University

  22. Please be aware
    that national authorities in France and Israel are advising against
    wi-fi expansion, especially in schools with younger children. Many
    authorities have noted that standards for wireless exposures differ by
    several orders of magnitude, with those in the home country of the World
    Health Organization, Switzerland being among the most stringent in the
    world.”Dr Devra Davis

  23. “Wired systems
    are far more safe, secure, and speedy, and avoid potential long term
    public health issues. In addition, wired systems will protect the
    growing number of persons who are hypersensitive to wi-fi exposures, as
    well as limit risks to persons with pace-makers or those with other
    implanted electronic or metal devices that can absorb greater amounts of
    such radiation.”Dr Devra Davis

  24. Martha Herbert,
    M.D., Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital :

    “In fact, there are thousands of papers that have accumulated over decades and
    are now accumulating at an accelerating pace, as our ability to measure impacts
    become more sensitive that document adverse health and neurological impacts of
    EMF/RFR. Children are more vulnerable than adults, and children with
    chronic illnesses and/or neurodevelopmental disabilities are even more
    vulnerable. “

    “EMF/RFR from wifi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the
    ability to learn and remember, and can
    also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function. This will make it harder for some children to
    learn, particularly those who are already having problems in the first place.“

  25. Joel Moskowitz,
    Ph.D., School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley

    “I have been calling on the FCC to strengthen its standards
    and testing procedures to protect the public and workers from the low-intensity,
    non-thermal risks of RF EMR exposure that have been reported in hundreds, if
    not thousands, of research studies. These include increased risk of neurological
    and cardiovascular problems, sperm damage and male infertility, reproductive
    health risks, and cancer.”

  26. “There
    is consistent emerging science that shows people, especially children
    are affected by the increasing exposure to wireless radiation. In
    September 2010, theJournal of the American Society for Reproductive
    Medicine ‐ Fertility and Sterility reported that only four hours of
    exposure to a standard laptop using WiFi caused DNA damage to human
    sperm.”

    “In
    May 2011, the World Health Organization elevated exposure to wireless
    radiation, including WiFi, onto the Class 2b list of Carcinogens.”

  27. Cell phone and Wi-Fi radiation, is a “possible carcinogen” to humans, like DDT and lead.Let me stress that ICNIRP is under pressure to change these levels asap,something they should have done years ago,as they were fully aware of the dangers they were exposing earth to.We are currently part of the biggest human experiment ever undertaken on humans – without our consent.

  28. Personally I gave up Coke-Cola a few years ago, but clever marketing plan. I just wonder how they would stop local business owners from PERMANENTLY using the service. Unless it is the “business owner” that pays for the access ?

  29. To the CEO of Coke in SA:i am stillwaiting for a response from you-and here is Prof Hardell’s latest research for you to ponder upon: We concluded that glioma and also acoustic neuroma
    are caused by RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones, and thus regarded
    as carcinogenic, under Group 1 according to the IARC classification,
    indicating that current guidelines for exposure should be urgently
    revised. This pooled analysis gives further support to that conclusion
    regarding glioma. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928468014000649, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pathophys.2014.10.001

  30. AGAIN,I ASK THE CEO OF COKE TO RESPOND:
    WHAT ARE WE DOING TO OUR WORLD?WHY IS THIS TOPIC NOT INCLUDED IN CLIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING?
    1. We disturb and destroy nature on a daily basis with our environmentally adverse technologies.
    Plants and animals suffer stoically and quietly from the effects of mobile radio and similar communications technologies.
    AC-produced microwaves don’t occur naturally in nature,Dying forests have as much,if not more, to do with microwaves than with CO2 and acid rain.

    A bird flock’s or a whale’s sense of orientation .becomes
    scrambled.They become lost or end up beaching, thus meeting their end.
    Many bird species are breeding less often and are in danger of becoming
    extinct.Cats, dogs, birds, cattle, bees and horses are affected.

    Animals may not know the danger of microwaves, but they still suffer
    from their effects. Animals are neither hysterical nor hypochondriac and
    make the perfect test subjects for the allegedly “harmless”
    radiation.They simply become sick and die.
    2.Dr. Warnke :
    “Today, unprecedented exposure levels and intensities of magnetic,
    electric, and electromagnetic fields from numerous wireless technologies
    interfere with the natural information system and functioning of
    humans, animals, and plants. The consequences of this development, which
    have already been predicted by critics for many decades, cannot be
    ignored anymore. Bees and other insects vanish; birds avoid certain
    places and become disorientated ”
    3. French researchers, under the
    direction of Alain Vian at the Equipe de Recherche Transduction et
    Autosurveillance Cellulaire, Universite Blaise Pascal in Aubière, have
    shown that tomato plants react to the damage from the relatively weak
    900 MHz radiation from cell towers. The scientists believe they found an
    environmental factor that instantly impacts the genetic material in
    the tomato cells, which in turn resulted in the tomato plant cells
    reacting with a chemical damage sequence, involving the molecule
    calmodulin. The effect was described as “exactly as if we had crushed
    them with a hammer,” by the scientists.It was enough to expose a few
    leaves of the plant for the entire plant to react.The damage was
    lessened however, on the parts of the plant that were shielded from the
    radiation. Somewhat similar effects at cellular level as applicable to
    humans have been published by Prof Martin Pall and Dr Andrew
    Goldsworthy.
    4.A survey carried out in 2011 in Lausanne,
    Switzerland, has shown that the signal from the cell phones may not only
    confuse also bees, but cause their death. When researchers exposed
    beehives to
    cell phone radiation, the bees occupying the hive
    simply choose to move away and never return. This is exactly the
    behavior that beekeepers worldwide call CCD, Colony Collapse Disorder, a
    phenomenon that involves an abrupt disappearance of bees from their
    hives.
    5.Wi-Fi even affects the common tadpole.: radiation emitted
    by phone masts affect the development and cause an increase in
    mortality of exposed tadpoles.This may have huge implications for the
    natural world, which is now exposed to high microwave radiation levels
    from a multitude of phone masts.
    “unproven” side effects of mobile phones and other communications.radiation.
    6.THIS SAYS IT ALL

    Dept. of Interior Attacks FCC regarding Adverse Impact of Cell Tower
    Radiation on Wildlife -the Department of Interior charges that the FCC
    standards for cell phone radiation are outmoded and no longer applicable
    as they do not adequately protect wildlife.
    7.Electromagnetic noise is emitted everywhere that humans use
    electronic devices. The observations from the Oldenburg study suggest
    that birds utilize a biological system that is sensitive to manmade
    electromagnetic noise with intensities well below the guidelines for
    human exposure adopted by the World Health Organization.

  31. Professor Hardell’s latest research states that cellphone radiation causes brain cancer.are you educating the children that uses your free wi-fi about this?IMPORTANT: PROF HARDELL’S LATEST RESEARCH

    New study on cell phone risks by Hardell & Carlberg in Sweden again
    indicating that RF-EMF should be classified by IARC/WHO as a
    (causative) “Carcinogen” as opposed to the present 2B classification,
    “Possible Carcinogen”.

    Conclusion. “We previously analysed the
    evidence on glioma associated with the use of wireless phones using the
    Hill criteria [20]. We concluded that
    glioma and also acoustic neuroma are caused by RF-EMF emissions from
    wireless phones, and thus regarded as carcinogenic, under Group 1
    according to the IARC classification, indicating that current guidelines
    for exposure should be urgently revised. This pooled analysis gives
    further support to that conclusion regarding glioma. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928468014000649, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pathophys.2014.10.001

  32. Ah – conflict of interest by Wilma – the more people she scares with her nonsense the more phony “radiation protection products” she can see. Probably sells those magic crystals that mysteriously block all “harmful” radiation.

  33. Frederique Zug on

    The best use for tin foil hats it to stop the radiation from WiFi and smart meter transmitters. Put the hat on top of the transmitter and now the whole family can enjoy the radiation free zone.

    tinyurl dot com forward slash lsbbpz8 Fix the link
    Could smart meters cause health problems in cancer survivors?
    While RF exposure might not cause cancer directly, there is concern that cells in the body that have been damaged by exposure to some other substance might somehow be more likely to become cancerous when exposed to RF waves. In theory, this might be a concern for cancer patients being treated with ionizing radiation and/or medicines that might cause cancer themselves.

  34. Frederique Zug on

    Hi Derek Ward.. Why don’t you explain the June 9th 2011 report where the IDIOTS at BC Hydro used the wrong test set so they could report NO radiation levels? Any you want to believe you? Ha Ha

  35. Frederique Zug on

    Hi Derek Ward.. Why don’t you explain the June 9th 2011 report where
    the IDIOTS at BC Hydro used the wrong test set so they could report NO
    radiation levels? Any you want to believe you? Ha

  36. Frederique Zug on

    YES I have to agree with you, anyone who thinks RADIATION is good for your health is a WACKO.

  37. Frederique Zug on

    What is this, another conspiracy theory from people who think radiation is good for your health?
    Stick with the facts. Radiation kills and the moon is not made of cheese.

  38. Frederique Zug on

    Why do I want to call you a liar? Is it because you know nothing about radiation?
    Transmission range of a shielded microwave 5cm’s
    Transmission range of a cell tower 25 Kilometers.
    Transmission range of a cordless phone 30 meters.
    Transmission range of a car alarm 0 meters.
    Transmission range of a bluetooth 3 meters.
    Transmission range of a WiFi 30 meters.
    Transmission range of a smart meter is 27 kilometers.
    So what is your point? What is the safe distance for a patient with an implanted medical device for a WiFi transmitter.
    If you are susceptible to EMF, can you turn off a WiFi transmitter?

  39. Frederique Zug on

    People like you HATE disabled folks. Why is that?
    How come disabled folks with an implanted medical device are given no warning about the RADIATION LEVELS?
    Fix the link and get back to us.

    tinyurl dot com forward slash lsbbpz8

  40. Frederique Zug on

    That is my point, people with implanted medical devices need to be protected from IDIOTS like you who don’t care about their health.

  41. Greg Mahlknecht on

    I haven’t done the studies, but I’ve seen the reports from the Canadian and Belgian governments who have done the largest and longest spanning studies in the world – millions of people over decades. Both concluded it’s safe.

  42. Greg Mahlknecht on

    You’re kidding, right? Blanket “radiation” scare-mongering is just stupid. Without the radiation from the sun the earth would be devoid of life. There are degrees of radiation, and the radiation these devices give off are about as harmless as what you get from the sun lazing in the shade of a tree on a cloudy day. In fact it’s probably less – with a solar panel the size of my body I could easily harness enough radiation there to power a cellphone. Which in turn could give off more harmless radiation.

  43. Frederique Zug on

    For who?? Dead people? How come disabled folks with implanted medical devices are thrown out to the wolves? Well Greg, how about a written guarantee disabled folks are 100% safe, can you do that for us?

  44. Frederique Zug on

    How come disabled folks with implanted medical devices are thrown out to the wolves? Well Greg, how about a written guarantee disabled folks are 100% safe, can you do that for us? Do you know what the compliance from the center of an
    WiFi antenna?

  45. Greg Mahlknecht on

    Sure, no problem. The burden of proof is on them if something goes wrong. I’d sign that guarantee.

  46. Greg Mahlknecht on

    >Cell phone and Wi-Fi radiation, is a “possible carcinogen” to humans, like DDT and lead

    And petrol. And the sun. And coffee. If you drive a car, drink coffee or go out in the day time, you cannot use this argument. Period. You can’t have it both ways.

  47. Greg Mahlknecht on

    Thanks for that link. It disproved your earlier point.

    >… A study that examined the effect of smart meters on pacemakers and implantable defibrillators found that the smart meters did not interfere with these devices.

    Your link. I assume you accept the information in it as being true?

  48. Greg Mahlknecht on

    The center of the antenna, you mean like if someone was stabbed with an antenna, the radiation they’d get from being in such close proximity to the center of it? I think we can both agree that’d be a bad thing.

  49. Greg Mahlknecht on

    You’re 100% right, I could not have said it better myself… Lindi is both ignorant, and creates fear 🙂

  50. Frederique Zug on

    So, if you don’t tell the truth, nobody will know how they died??? I think it’s called RISK MANAGEMENT.

  51. Lindi, you touch a topic that I have been wondering about.

    Are there credible sources/research that you could share please?

  52. Greg Mahlknecht on

    You can’t go taking every looney at their word when they want to push the blame on to something, at some point they have to come up with some proof… what’s next – blaming the tooth fairy for stealing things when they get misplaced?

  53. Frederique Zug on

    Am I going to believe everything the loonies tell us? NO
    I have examples of power companies using the wrong test sets so their RF levels are far below acceptable levels. Those are loonies. I have example of these WRONG readings being posted on some medical sites. Which LOONEY should I believe? Are there people out their who claim to be suffering from so sort of RF/ Radiation / EMF sickness? YES, So all of these millions of folks are suffering from some sort imaginary sickness? That many? Am I going to call them LIARS? NO
    So why are you qualifies to say they are? So you have a post nominal for call sick folks LOONIES?

  54. Greg Mahlknecht on

    A quick search reveals 4-7% of the population suffer from being hypochondriacs. Split the difference at 5%, that’s 250 million people suffering from, as you put it “imaginary sickness”.

    The Radiation/EMF sickness numbers are an insignificant percentage of that 250 million, so yes – it’s quite possible they are suffering from an imaginary sickness. I wouldn’t call them liars, because they really do believe they’re telling the truth. They have a problem, but it’s not the problem they think they have.

    I still wonder why the EMF/Radiation people venture out in to daylight when it’s proven 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt that sunlight can cause cancer. Even worse, they expose their children to it. Why do they hate their children?

  55. Frederique Zug on

    Wait a minute stupid. Since when did I say “imaginary sickness”

    I didn’t claim to be a doctor like you do. I still missed the Post Nominal from your name.

    Sunlight is ionizing radiation and requires sun screen to protect children.

    Most household radiation is from cellphones at 1 watt and smart meters at 4 watts. The distance to compliance is 15cm’s for a cell phone and 20cm’s for a smart meter. How do you turn off a smart meter and stop your child from getting cancer back?
    tinyurl dot com forward slash sbbpz8

  56. Greg Mahlknecht on

    >Wait a minute stupid. Since when did I say “imaginary sickness”

    2 posts up. Either that or someone is using your computer. Now who’s stupid?

    You’re just getting boring now, repeating the same old tired BS, and zero facts. Don’t expect any more replies.

  57. Frederique Zug on

    Your quote “Split the difference at 5%, that’s 250 million people suffering from, as ((you)) put it “imaginary sickness”.
    My quote “Wait a minute stupid. Since when did ((I ))say “imaginary sickness”
    ——————————————————————————
    Since when is telling the truth “repeating the same old tired BS, and zero facts” You really are a sick puppy.

  58. I moved our discussions here because here you also show your hypocritical behavior.
    You claim how hydro have conflict interest and yet your reference is from site which sell anti-radiation products…. They dont have conflict of interest?
    About our last comments

    Your last comment to me:

    “I’m the hypocrite? Yah right.
    Yell at the American Cancer Society, they are ones telling us smart meters bring back Cancer.
    It seems you are an expert, so answer a few questions to PROVE you are a ROCKET SCIENTIST.
    What is the MAXIMUM eirp allowed in the ISM band?
    What is the nominal power of an AMI7 smart meter?
    Now let’s see who is incompetent? STUPID”

    You are hypocrite because you are cited them, arent they claim that cell phone have more power that smart meter? arent you claim opposite? that why you are hypocryte.
    “Yell at the American Cancer Society” Why I should yell at them? you take their statements and claim opposite.
    “What is the MAXIMUM eirp allowed in the ISM band?”- 4W/cm^2

    “What is the nominal power of an AMI7 smart meter?” I know you will say 4 Watts dont you?

    Compared to you Im not incompetent. Now you answer my question with no excuses, show that you have BASIC knowledge in topic You wrote here “Radiation kills ” if you wrote such statment you should know mechanism or maybe you spread things you dont understand?. How radiation can cause cancer (mechanism)?. So what that you know how much power have smart meter if you dont know how its act to human body show us that you are not complete Stupid.”

  59. Frederique Zug on

    Guest said ” yet your reference is from site which sell anti-radiation products…. They dont have conflict of interest?”
    Who might that be???<—————————

    Guest said "How radiation can cause cancer (mechanism)?."
    If you had read the American Cancer Society warning, they said RF causes CANCER to RETURN. So reading isn't your best suite?
    So now I can quote you
    Smart meter is "What is the MAXIMUM eirp allowed in the ISM band?"- 4W/cm^2 (AMI7 produces 1.1W/cm^2 max)
    So now who is the hypocrite? Can't make up your mind?
    Come on get with the program.
    What is the DO NOT INSTALL DISTANCE of a AMI7 smart meter?

  60. Guest said ” yet your reference is from site which sell anti-radiation products…. They dont have conflict of interest?”
    Who might that be???- because I point you that you cited how hydro have conflict of interest and yet cited the same flawed sources? common.

    I ask you about mechanism not if it cause so answer to question if you want asking others. Correcting your incompetence again they dont claim that “If you had read the American Cancer Society warning, they said RF causes CANCER to RETURN. So reading isn’t your best suite? ” but rather “In theory, this might be a concern for cancer patients being treated with ionizing radiation and/or medicines that might cause cancer themselves. Animal studies have not shown evidence of this and this effect has not been studied in people.” In theory and concern not cause abd they also point that studies shows no evidence. So who have problem with reading?

    :Smart meter is “What is the MAXIMUM eirp allowed in the ISM band?” 4W/cm^2 Im wrong ? where I wrote anything about that AMI7 produces 1.1W/cm^2 max? Do you have delusions?

    So I renew my question How radiation can cause cancer (mechanism)?

  61. Frederique Zug on

    I never said smart meters cause cancer for healthy folks. I DID say the American Cancer Society warns us that RF brings back cancer. What difference does it make??????
    RF KILLS HOMEOWNERS.

  62. I DID say the American Cancer Society and here you are also wrong:

    ” concern has been voiced that cells in the body that have been damaged by exposure to some other substance might somehow be more likely to become cancerous when exposed to RF waves. In theory, this might be a concern for cancer patients being treated with ionizing radiation and/or medicines that might cause cancer themselves. ” What the say that concern has been voiced, this only is theory not supported by studies “Animal studies have not shown evidence of this and this effect has not been studied in people.” This only show in how many fields studies are performed

    “RF KILLS HOMEOWNERS.” another your statement how kill? In the same comment at the beginning you wrote “I never said smart meters cause cancer for healthy folks.”you deny to yourself

  63. Frederique Zug on

    Of special concern are people with implanted medical devices like deep-brain stimulators for Parkinson’s, some pacemakers, insulin pumps, and in-home hospital equipment. The radiofrequency interference (RFI) inherent to Smart Grids can cause such equipment to go haywire, or even to stop. And RFI from ambient exposures has caused wheelchairs to go off peers or into traffic; automatic ignition switches in cars refuse to start until cars are towed to RF-free blocks; and surgical beds have jumped during operations.
    RFI is also suspected in sudden acceleration of automobiles.

    The World Health Organization – International Agency for Research on Cancer May, 2011
    “The Working Group did not quantitate the risk;
    however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10 year period)… *the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion … that there could be some risk*, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk.
    Let me count the ways.

  64. Of special concern are people with implanted medical devices like…..- this phenomenon is called Electromagnetic interference and can be caused even by hair dryer. But this is old history, you begin to lose in the comments becauce I explained this to you in past comments. I will do one more time now this devices have developed a detailed test method to measure EMI of for example implanted cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators from cell phones. This test method is now part of a standard also do you hear term Electromagnetic compatibility? which refers to the ability of electronic devices of different types to operate in an electromagnetic environment without loss of intended function. The EMC of the affected device affects the degree of malfunction that may occur. Newer devices are designed according to more stringent standards, with attention to shielding and electromagnetic immunity, and are less susceptible to EMI. Equipment manufactured before 1993 are more susceptible to EMI as compared with more modern equipment, which are now subject to International Electrotechnical Commission Standard 60601-1-2. Even more higher standards are required for critical and life-support devices. This mean that in this time if such case are happend the fault lies with the manufacturer not smart grid (or other electric device). About study from 2004 from this study WHO set classification 2B “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” is the same risk level WHO ascribes to coffee and pickled vegetables. This meand that agent in even one study show little assocation but this is not evidence more likely precautionary principle. This study was based on 10 years use now we have studies 15 and 20 years use showing no link. Good sources are scandinavia nations because their the earliest started to use cell phones. THats why theirs reports are most valuable

    tinyurl dot com slash l9pgyxz

    tinyurl dot com slash p2xmgur

    tinyurl dot com slash ls7xtw5

    Also dont forget this studies are cross-sectional type and Correlation does not imply causation, smoking also cause cancer yes? but, smoking in past years decline cancer increase conclusion? smoking protect agains cancer you see the error in this reasoning? but this is cross-sectional studies with one error. Belive me even small error can cause that entire study is flawed such as economic status wrong adjustment or other factors. So if you have cross-sectionall studies you take group of them check for what author adjust and seek correlation and even then you dont have confidence because always is chance that some factors cause flaws.

  65. Frederique Zug on

    Implanted medical devices
    Manufacturers of medical devices recommend a minimum separation of 15.3 centimetres (6 inches) between a wireless device and an implanted medical device, such as a pacemaker or implanted cardioverter defibrillator, to avoid
    potential interference with the medical device. Persons who have such devices should: Always keep the wireless device more than 15.3 centimetres (6 inches) from the medical
    device
    Should read and follow the directions from the manufacturer of your implantable medical device. if you have any questions about using your wireless phone with such a device, consult your health care provider.
    Should turn the phone OFF immediately if there is any reason to suspect that interference is taking place.

    Of special concern are people with implanted medical devices like deep-brain stimulators for Parkinson’s, some pacemakers, insulin pumps, and in-home hospital equipment. The radiofrequency interference (RFI) inherent to Smart Grids can cause such equipment to go haywire, or even to stop. And RFI from ambient exposures has caused wheelchairs to go off peers or into traffic; automatic ignition switches in cars refuse to start until cars are towed to
    RF-free blocks; and surgical beds have jumped during operations.
    RFI is also suspected in sudden acceleration of automobiles.

  66. When you wrote comment wrote something yours, because here you only copy others words.

    “Implanted medical devices

    Manufacturers of medical devices recommend a minimum separation of 15.3 centimetres (6 inches) between a wireless device and an implanted medical device, such as a pacemaker or implanted cardioverter defibrillator, to avoid”

    Why they wrote this? because like I say some use older technology and are at risk of EMI. I wrote you how this changes in our times. “The Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) published Technical Information Report (TIR) 18, Guidance on electromagnetic compatibility of medical devices for clinical/biomedical engineers -Part 1: Radiated radio-frequency electromagnetic energy. TIR 18 provides information and guidance on medical device EMC to clinical engineers and other biomedical personnel to help them evaluate the radiated radio-frequency (RF) electromagnetic environment in their individual health-care facilities and implement actions needed to minimize the potential risks associated with electromagnetic interference (EMI) problems. This document contains sections on assessing the RF environment in the clinic, developing policies, examples of device interactions, and a bibliography of references for device EMC.”

    “Of special concern ……… suspected in sudden acceleration of automobiles.” You wrote/copy the same in previous comment I dont see reason why you do this again, but thanks this I realize that you copy this from Havas statment…. Its like I be posting statment of mobile phone idnustry which claim that smartphones are safe, both are flawed. Havas have conflict of interest look with who she doing researchs with manufacturer of stealzer filters stetzer filters. She takes this report from eighties and nineties where I say you there was no technology with protect against EMI ( you give good example how researcher can manipulate studies results to supports their claims). She refused doing her research in free environment (without emf pollution) some tv chanell want funded this her to prove her right like I say she refused.

  67. Frederique Zug on

    Of special concern are people with implanted medical devices like deep-brain stimulators for Parkinson’s, some pacemakers, insulin pumps, and in-home hospital equipment. The radiofrequency interference (RFI) inherent to Smart Grids can cause such equipment to go haywire.
    So please the world that a patient with deep brain stimulators are 100% safe at ANY distance.

    Can you do that?

  68. Now you only copy information for the third time to which they I replied check my previous comments.

  69. Greg Mahlknecht on

    I thought I’d humour you and check that article out. Just like every similar article, you can trace it and/or its sources back to people directly profiting off the anti-EMF bandwagon.

    Here’s an article which pretty much destroys the credibility of every item in that Hardell “study” you linked to. You’d be best to not use that study any more or cite it as credible, because anybody who actually follows up on it will know that there really is no evidence to support your view.

    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/critique-of-risk-of-brain-tumors-from-wireless-phone-use/

    And don’t just dismiss it has someone hating your viewpoint, actually read and understand it – you’re being lied to and you are helping spread the lies and basically being played for a fool to help the guys that throw together these BS studies to profit off the hysteria that is created.