Powerwatch Frequently Asked Questions
[Home Page]
[Guide to EMFs]
[Guidance Levels]
[Unit Conversion]
[Studies List]
[Bias]
[EMFs pre-2000]
[FAQs]
[Publications]
[Links]
General Site FAQs
Mobile and Cordless Phones
Mobile Phone Masts / Base Stations
Wifi and Computing
Housing and Wiring
Other FAQs
General Site FAQs
FAQs on using the Powerwatch Website
Due to popular request, the following will give step by step instructions
on the different sections of our site. Each of the pages will open in its own,
separate window:
[Return to top]
Mobile and Cordless Phones
Are Digital Cordless Phones (DECT) dangerous?
There has been quite a lot of publicity about the research showing that using
digital cordless (DECT) phones results in similar adverse health effects as
using a mobile phone, including the risk of developing brain tumours [1,2,3,4].
We have had concerned parents on the phone to us, explaining that their
children do not use their mobile phones at home, due to the possible health
effects, so they talk for long periods of time on the cordless phones
instead. They appreciate the privacy of a cordless phone, and can shut
themselves in their bedroom, the bathroom, anywhere to keep their calls private.
Unfortunately, it may have unforeseen consequences that neither they nor
their parents could have anticipated.
We have written a much more detailed article on DECT phones in our article library, available from here.
References
2. P
Hardell L et al, (February 2006) Case-control study of the association between the use of cellular and cordless telephones and malignant brain tumors diagnosed during 2000-2003, Environ Res. 2006 Feb;100(2):232-41 [ View Author's abstract conclusions] [ View
on Pubmed]
4. P
Hardell L et al, (2005) Case-control study on cellular and cordless telephones and the risk for acoustic neuroma or meningioma in patients diagnosed 2000-2003, Neuroepidemiology. 2005;25(3):120-8 [ View Author's abstract conclusions] [ View
on Pubmed]
[Return to top]
Are phones with low SARs safer?
It was recommended by the Stewart Report, in 2000, that information about
Specific Absorption Rates (SARs) should be provided with every mobile phone
bought, making it easier to compare them. SARs are one way of measuring the
amount of radiation emitted by the phone. The higher the SAR, the greater the
amount of microwaves that are likely to be absorbed by the head.
ICNIRP sets an SAR standard of 2 W/kg maximum in any 10 grammes of tissue,
which applies to many European countries including the UK. SARs cannot be
measured directly, only by using sophisticated models and computer mathematical
modelling techniques to simulate the radiation from the phones. The results vary
depending on the test equipment used, the design of the mobile phone's antenna,
and the position in which the phone is held by the user. Measurements in test
situations do not necessarily accurately reflect the differences in head
tissue type and age of the exposed person. The SAR is greatly affected by how
you hold your fingers on the back of the phone in order to press the phone to
your ear - especially in phones with internal antennas.
One of the main shortcomings of the SAR as a useful guide is that they are
measured with the handset operating at full power, taking no account of the
efficiency of any given handset, which can be considerable. In response to
low signal strength, an efficient handset powers up less than an inefficient
handset, thus exposing the head to lower radiation. Some phones with a high
peak SAR actually produce lower SARs under normal use conditions than phones
with a low peak SAR. The maximum power output from a GSM mobile phone is
around 2 W peak, but this can reduce in a sequence of 15 steps down to around
0.002 W during calls, a power reduction factor of 1000. This is primarily
dependent on the signal level in the area the phone is being used.
The other issue is that SAR values are based on the assumption of "total RF
dose" (i.e. with the dose delivered at a constant level over a fixed period of
time). In reality, exposure to mobile phones and cordless phones is an exposure
to a series of high powered "pulses". Imagine an ordinary egg: If you put a
constant firm pressure on the egg, it will survive intact for some considerable
time. If, however, you hit it sharply several times a second (but with exactly
the same 'average' force), it is most unlikely to remain unbroken for the
same amount of time. It is possible that peak values of the pulses is more
important to measure than a time-weighted average.
New phones in the UK are forced by law to display maximum SAR levels in the
manual that comes with the phone. However, Powerwatch's opinion is that SARs are
only minimally useful as they are based only on thermal effects. Most recent
scientific literature indicating concern from mobile phone usage indicate
non-thermal effects, for which SAR values are irrelevant.
If you are concerned about exposure but wish to continue using your phone,
then you would be much better using a airtube hands-free kit (conventionally
wired hands-free kits can increase your exposure as the fields can travel up the
wires from the handset to the headphones) which can reduce the effective SAR to
your head by 500-fold.
[Return to top]
Is GSM more dangerous than CDMA technology?
GSM and DECT technology use a series of low-frequency periodic (regular)
bursts of microwave radiation. CDMA should have been less problematic as the
modulation is less "aggressive" and the power is spread over a wider bandwidth
of microwave frequencies and therefore has a lower signal strength for the same
amount of transmitted power.
However we are finding far more problems being reported by people in the UK
with the two CDMA based systems used here - 3G (UMTS) and TETRA. These do not
fully comply with true CDMA in that they both also impose regular low frequency
timing pulses into the signal. Also the phase modulation used produces a lot of
electrical/electronic noise in the 1000 to 20000 Hz (audio) frequency band (that
sounds like a field of amplified crickets or circadas if demodluated and
listened to - e.g. with an Electrosmog Dectector). It may be this noise that is
the most bioactive.
[Return to top]
Do answerphones for ordinary and cordless phones give off EMFs?
All answerphones with plug-in transformers (the "box-like" adapter plugs) are
surrounded by significant levels of mains-frequency magnetic fields within 50
centimetres, but do not give off RF electromagnetic fields.
With a cordless phone however, the answerphone is built into the base unit.
The base unit for a digital cordless phone is likely to be giving off
RF electromagnetic fields at all times, even when the handsets are not in use.
The only way to be sure whether or not the answerphone attached to your phone
is giving off EMF radiation is to measure the fields.
[Return to top]
Mobile Phone "Chips"
How do I know whether I can trust the research done to support mobile phone EMF safety microchips?
Evaluating the usefulness of support documentation for devices that protect
against EMFs:
1. Valid Citation
All citations for studies and papers should be correctly referenced, mainly
so that it is easy to validate that the person stated as the author exists, and
the organisation they work for has a recognised authoritative voice, with any
potential biases expressed or likely to be known by the wider scientific
community. The journal and page numbers on which the paper was published in
should also be present.
2. Experimentation Method
Experiments should give details of the participants, and as much information
as possible on the environment they were in at the time of experiment. If doses
/ levels of substances or other such values are used, the reasons for using
these values should be explained with citations where appropriate. Measurements
and values should always have units, which should be recognised units of
measurement for the objective values being taken. Experimental conditions should
be fully explained, with acknowledgements for any possible confounders (such as
selection bias) that may affect the efficacy of the experiment.
3. Results and Conclusions
Results and conclusions should be based firmly on what was tested, with
appropriate reservations and tentative hypotheses, as necessary, clearly
expressed as such. No extravagant claims should be made which appear to be out
of context, or are unsupported by the research findings. With regard to devices
that are supposed to protect against microwave radiation, there are some
companies which claim that using their device makes the person healthier than
normal. This is a clearly extraordinary claim, and should be regarded as
suspicious. Claims should be not only supported by the research, but by common
sense as well.
The conclusions should be more than a statistical summary of the results.
There should be an explanation as to how the results are actually achieved
experimentally, and some comments to explain the results produced.
There should be references to other work that show similar results or that
look at closely related science, and how the current study fits into the
ongoing scientific debate.
Summary
Research that does not at least partially address all of these issues is
likely to have been poorly conducted. Studies without good independent research
backing up the findings with a plausible explanation, need to be further
investigated before being accepted as a valid evaluation of a product.
[Return to top]
What are EMX Biochips? Do they really work?
EMX biochips are a technology based on genuine scientific research. These are
not the same as "protection devices" that are widely marketed yet have no real
effect (other than placebo). The EMX devices work on the basis of superimposing
random, low frequency magnetic fields over other electromagnetic fields (EMFs)
being emitted by other devices. The theory behind this is that the extra fields
hide the unwated EMFs, in a similar way to music being played in a restaurant
hides conversations between other people on nearby tables.
A number of peer-reviewed scientific studies have been carried out and
replicated, showing that this has genuine scientific basis. [1,2,3].
While this appears to be effective, we do not think that increasing EMFs is an
ideal solution, and we believe that other options should be explored first.
References
2. -
Farrell JM et al, (1998) The superposition of a temporally incoherent magnetic field inhibits 60 Hz-induced changes in the ODC activity of developing chick embryos, Bioelectromagnetics. 1998;19(1):53-6 [ View Author's abstract conclusions] [ View
on Pubmed]
3. -
Litovitz TA et al, (1994) Superimposing spatially coherent electromagnetic noise inhibits field-induced abnormalities in developing chick embryos, Bioelectromagnetics. 1994;15(2):105-13 [ View Author's abstract conclusions] [ View
on Pubmed]
[Return to top]
Who are Exradia? Do their products really work?
Exradia is a company that has bought up the rights to the EMX technology that
was developed by the late Ted Litovitz of Washington State University. The only
application so far available are special Nokia mobile phone batters with the
noise pulsing circuits built into them. We have not tested them, but they are
based on EMX technology which has scientifically supported claims of positive
effects. (See refs in section above)
[Return to top]
Mobile Phone Masts / Base Stations
What Planning regulations may apply to mobile phone base stations?
Many of the planning guidelines for mobile phone infrastructure, such
as PPG8, are only guidelines, they are not legally binding. Some
of the guidelines have been challenged in law, and have created case-law
precedence which will have more force of law than the guidelines themselves.
Scotland have their own guidelines NPPG19 and PAN62 advice note and Wales have
their TAN19 panning guidelines.
We give some brief comments below, but probably the most informative websites
with respect to UK mobile phone mast planning issues are
www.planningsanity.co.uk,
www.mastsanity.org and
www.mastaction.co.uk.
Planning permission
General Permitted Development Orders
Telecommunications 'transmission devices' require planning permission unless
they are "permitted development" as defined in the General Permitted Development
Order (as amended). Masts up to 15 metres high, and most antennas on buildings,
come within "permitted developments" and local councils can have little say over
the siting of these. They can suggest alternative sites, but few councils
actually do this. Masts over 15 metres high do need full planning permission.
GPDO Order 2001 paragraphs A.1(g) and A.1(h) set a limit on the number of
antenna systems that may be placed on a particular building without the need to
seek planning permission. Operators have managed to effectively get around most
of the restrictions by claiming that they offer "a mobile phone network" that
uses both GSM and 3G and allows them to have GSM900, GSM1800 and 3G counted as
"one system".
Small antennas and 'de minimis' developments
These do not need full planning permission. Small antennas can be fixed to
most existing structures and no permission is required, just notification.
'De minimis' additions are outside of planning and are considered as those which
are not being development within the meaning of Section 55 of the Town and
Country Act 1990 (subsection 2), and not materially affecting the
external appearance of the building or other structure. See:
link for further information about such
base-station antennas.
Breaches of output conditions
Planning permission is solely granted on the condition that the exposure
guidelines are not exceeded. In practice it is most unlikely that masts will
ever exceed the high ICNIRP Guidance levels that are currently in force.
Planning Policy Guideline 8 (PPG8)
In August 2001, the UK Government announced the revised PPG8 on
telecommunications. This should be read bearing in mind the following points:
- The Government believes that the planning system is not the place for
determining health safeguards, and that it takes responsibility for
deciding what measures are necessary to protect public health.
- The Government is concerned to keep the numbers of radio and
telecommunications masts to the minimum practicable with the operation of
the network. They believe that sharing of masts and sites should be
encouraged wherever possible.
- Applicants will need to show evidence that they have explored the
possibility of erecting antennas on an existing building, mast or other
structure, which should be used wherever possible. Sympathetic design
and camouflage, to enable the development to blend into the landscape,
should be used to minimise the impact of development on the environment.
Careful consideration should be given to screening and planting.
- The Government incorrectly says that "the Stewart report does not
provide any basis for precautionary actions beyond those already proposed".
(Notice No. 12 HC 330 had suggested "Operators should make a declaration
that emissions likely to be produced by a new base station are 'as low as
reasonably practicable', as suggested in the Stewart Report".
- In the Government's view, local planning authorities should not
implement their own precautionary policies e.g. by way of imposing a ban or
moratorium on new telecommunications development, or insisting on minimum
distances between new telecommunications development and existing
developments.
In summary, there is usually little you can do to oppose a new mast. If you
act quickly then you can insist that other sites are considered. However, most
masts are now sited in residential areas to cope with the large number of mobile
phone calls residents are making from their houses and so there is limited scope
for using alternative sites. The "radius" for fill-in coverage is often only
several hundred metres and in towns and cities small base stations are
sometimes necessary every 50 to 100 metres in every direction! People need to
greatly reduce their mobile phone use to avoid more base-stations being
installed close to their homes (often on lamp-posts now).
[Return to top]
How can I find out when a mobile phone mast was erected?
The best place to find out is the local council. If planning permission was
necessary to erect the mast, they should have the records. If planning
permission wasn't needed, and it was the subject of a General permitted
Development Order (GPDO), the council may have the information as operators
often inform the council, though they are not obliged to do so in all
circumstances. If the council do not have the details, you may want to contact
the operator direct, either from the information on the mast, or through the
sitefinder website query
section.
[Return to top]
What is the difference between a macrocell, a microcell and a picocell?
Macrocells
The antennas for macrocells are mounted on ground-based masts, rooftops or
other existing structures, at a height that provides a clear view over the
surrounding buildings and terrain. They have a clear view over the rooftops
of any surrounding buildings.
The area a macrocell is intended to cover is very variable, from at least 500
metres up to a maximum of about 35 km dependent upon capacity and clutter. The
powers above need multiplying by the maximum number of active carriers and by
the forward gain of the antennas, resulting in EIRPs between about 50 watts (17
dBW) and 1000 watts (30 dBW) per carrier frequency. Base stations typically have
4 carriers, but may have up to 16.
Microcells
Microcells are designed to provide radio infill coverage and additional call
capacity for high traffic densities in urban and suburban areas to users both
outdoors and within buildings. They are smaller than macrocell antennas and when
mounted on existing structures can often be disguised as building features.
Microcell base station antennas are lower than nearby building rooftops,
typically on the external walls of existing structures, lampposts and other
street furniture, so the coverage area is primarily defined by the street
layout. Cell coverage is usually up to 200 metres, possibly up to 500.
Typical radiated powers should be only a few watts, resulting in Equivalent
Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP) in the range 2 to 15 dBW (1.6 to 30 watts) per
channel. They should not exceed 17 dBW per carrier. Micro base stations
typically have between 2 and 6 carriers.
Picocells
Picocells provide more localised coverage than microcells, such as inside
buildings where coverage is poor or there are high numbers of users, such as
shopping precincts, airports and train stations. The antennas for picocells are
mounted inside buildings, typically on walls, ceilings or in ceiling cavities.
Picocells provide coverage within a building and more than one may be required
to cover an entire building. Users may be both mobile and fixed; fixed users are
exemplified by wireless local area networks (wLANs) between computers. Coverage
is defined by the shape and characteristics of rooms, and service quality is
dictated by the presence of furniture and people.
Picocell base stations have lower output powers than microcells, typically
less than one watt - i.e. comparable with a single mobile phone.
The official (ETSI) figures for the transmitter power per channel are:
| Cell Type and Frequency |
Power Range |
| Macrocells - GSM900 (8 Classes) |
2.5 - 640 Watts |
| Macrocells - GSM1800 (4 Classes) |
2.5 - 40 Watts |
| Microcells - GSM900 (3 Classes) |
0.008 - 0.25 Watts |
| Microcells - GSM1800 (3 Classes) |
0.05 - 1.6 Watts |
| Picocells - GSM900 (1 Class) |
0.02 - 0.1 Watts |
| Picocells - GSM1800 (1 Class) |
0.04 - 0.2 Watts |
The Stewart 2 report "Mobile Phones and Health 2004" released in January
2005, said in the Executive Summary paragraph 30 "The Board notes that whilst
the planning process applies to macrocells, it does not obviously apply to
microcells and picocells. It is important that, as the networks develop, there
is a need for clarity in terms of the legal responsibilities and regulations in
relation to the installation of microcells and picocells and the availability of
information about their deployment." This issue needs to be addressed
urgently as in a recent sitefinder survey by Powerwatch, we found 63% of masts
in Soho were under 10 metres in height (microcells) which do not need planning
permission.
Always remember that the more people who own a mobile phone, and the more
any mobile phone is used, the more masts will be needed in the community to
provide the network to support the calls.
[Return to top]
How do you know that the operators are keeping the power from masts as low as possible?
Local Planning Authorities use policy guidelines in order to make decisions
about planning matters: Planning Policy Guidelines 8 (PPG8), revised in August
2001 stated: "Mobile phone operators already keep their RF power outputs
to the lowest possible levels commensurate with effective service
provision"
We know that this is not so in a lot of circumstances. In order to find out
whether the base stations near you conform to this guideline, we have devised an
index (the REI) which gives you a quick rule-of-thumb means of assessing base
stations to check if the operator is actually radiating the local population at
a level that is "as low as possible".
To calculate the REI for each base station, find the base station on the
Ofcom database, note the EIRP,
given in dBW, and the height of the antennas. This is only the power per channel
(carrier), and most antennas have 4-6, sometimes more, channels. However, this
information is not easily available, so for comparison purposes, we compare the
single measurement as given on the database.
Convert EIRP in dBW to watts. Divide the EIRP number by 10 and then use the
antilog function on a calculator (usually shift + log), or use old fashioned
antilog tables, or in EXCEL spreadsheet use the cell formula: =10^(dBW/10) which
returns the value in watts. A summary table of some key values is given below
for checking purposes.
Divide this number of watts by the square of the height of the mast in
metres (Excel:"=watts/(height x height)") e.g. a 20 dBW (100 watt) 7 metre mast
has an REI of (100/49) = 2.0
Ideally base stations should have REIs of 1 or less, but 2 is acceptable away
from housing and schools. In our opinion anything above 2 is unacceptable and
either: (i) the mast should be higher, or (ii) the power should be lower.
This will identify the masts that are irradiating the local population the
most. You can then measure the microwave levels, using a COM, or Acousti-meter
(both available from
EMFields).
On high rise buildings, where the base station antennas are within about 200
metres of other residential high rise buildings, then instead of using the
absolute height from the ground, the difference in height from the top floor of
the nearest residential building to the antenna height should be used - e.g. an
antenna listed as a 43 metre high site may only have a 5 metre vertical
difference from a room window in a neighbouring residential block, then the 5
metre figure should be used which will produce a MUCH higher REI value for the
base station.
Power unit conversion chart
| dBW |
Watts |
dBW |
Watts |
dBW |
Watts |
| 3 dBW |
2.0 Watts |
13 dBW |
20 Watts |
23 dBW |
200 Watts |
| 4 dBW |
2.5 Watts |
14 dBW |
25 Watts |
24 dBW |
251 Watts |
| 5 dBW |
3.2 Watts |
15 dBW |
32 Watts |
25 dBW |
316 Watts |
| 6 dBW |
4 Watts |
16 dBW |
40 Watts |
26 dBW |
398 Watts |
| 7 dBW |
5 Watts |
17 dBW |
50 Watts |
27 dBW |
501 Watts |
| 8 dBW |
6 Watts |
18 dBW |
63 Watts |
28 dBW |
631 Watts |
| 9 dBW |
8 Watts |
19 dBW |
79 Watts |
29 dBW |
794 Watts |
| 10 dBW |
10 Watts |
20 dBW |
100 Watts |
30 dBW |
1000 Watts |
| 11 dBW |
13 Watts |
21 dBW |
126 Watts |
31 dBW |
1259 Watts |
| 12 dBW |
16 Watts |
22 dBW |
158 Watts |
32 dBW |
1585 Watts |
[Return to top]
Wifi and Computing
Are the concerns about the health effects of using Wireless Local Area
Network (wLAN) systems in school classrooms unfounded?
A number of schools have dismantled their wireless networks after lobbying by
worried parents and teachers, and others are under pressure to follow suit. We
ask whether this level of concern is warranted. We have covered this subject
in detail on our WiFi overview.
[Return to top]
Why is my laptop is giving off microwave (RF) radiation?
Most laptops now are sold with WiFi built-in, as it is assumed by the manufacturers that they will be used at home with a wireless internet system, or whilst the purchaser is 'on the move'.
If you do not wish to use it in this way, you may want to disable the WiFi system as your laptop will continue to radiate RF until it is disabled. Laptops vary as to how to achieve this, so we recommend that you look at the manufacturer's instructions to find out how this can be done. You may need to contact them directly if it is not clear.
Some software updates may re-enable your WiFi system, so it is worth while checking every now and again to ensure that the wireless capacity remains disabled.
Increasingly, laptops are being sold with a Bluetooth capability as well. This may be situated in a different part of the laptop to the WiFi circuitry, and will have to be separately disabled. Again, we refer you to the manufacturer's instructions or we suggest you contact them directly.
If you are unsure whether your laptop is emitting RF radiation or not, you can easily find out by hiring or buying one of EMFields RF monitors.
[Return to top]
I don't want a WiFi connection to broadband internet - what options do I have?
To connect to the internet, you need one of two things: either a cable
connection (via a company such as NTL) or a standard phone line. Modern internet
connections normally use a technology called ADSL (Asymmetrical Digital
Subscriber Line), which allows the phone to be used at the same time as surfing
on the internet. This technology needs to be enabled at your local telephone
exchange, but two thirds of the UK (as of Summer 2007) is now supported. Contact
your phone provider (for example BT) and ask them if they can provide broadband
to your house - if so they are also likely to send a package containing all you
need to connect your computer to the internet (modem, ADSL filter and cables).
The modem enables the computer to connect, and the filter ensures that you can
use the telephone at the same time as the internet (with only one line) without
having either service compromised.
Both cable and ADSL internet connections are entirely free of microwave EMF
emissions, and we have no reason to believe they could be a risk to health. It
is very important however, if you are concerned about health effects from
wireless communication devices, not to use one of the "BT Home hubs" to connect
your computer to the internet, as they act as both a wireless access point
(WiFi) and a DECT base unit (cordless phones) whenever they are powered. For an
alternative, ask in your local computer store for a non-wireless "router" -
there are a number of brands that manufacture these, and they are secure,
reliable and require very little setting up.
[Return to top]
Home Networking: What are dLAN devices and are they an EMF-safe alternative to WiFi?
dLAN devices, are an alternative solution to WiFi. They connect to one
another through the mains wiring in a building, allowing access to the
network/internet from any mains socket in the building.
What kind of EMFs do they emit?
Homeplug devices do add some RF noise to the mains wiring. However, the
levels we have measured (a few tens of microvolts) are negligible in comparison
with WiFi devices, and what increase in fields that we did see was only in very
close proximity to mains wiring (within a few tens of centimetres). Since we
already advise against spending large amounts of time in such close proximity to
mains wiring, we believe that the fields generated are unlikely to cause
problems other than in the the most highly electrically sensitive people.
We still think that wired Ethernet is the best option, however dLAN units
seem to be a reasonable compromise provided that you are aware that there are
potential problems, and we consider it to be vastly preferential to WiFi.
Security Considerations
There are additional security considerations when it comes to dLANs. Because
they use the mains wiring to transfer data, this means that anybody on your
wiring circuit can add their own dLAN unit and listen to the network traffic.
Since most houses have their own wiring circuit, this is only relevant in shared
housing and some flats. Some dLAN units offer features to encrypt the network,
which would eliminate this issue. We still consider dLAN units to be
significantly more secure than WiFi, which can be listened to simply by being
nearby, without requiring physical access to a plug socket. WiFi encryption
systems provide some level of security, but they are still not completely
secure from network intrusion.
[Return to top]
I have more than one computer and want them all to be able to use the internet - do I have to use WiFi?
No, not at all. If you have purchased a router for your internet connection
(see FAQ above), then you will have a number of network "ports". These are the
sockets at the back of the router that you plug the network cable from your
computer into. You can have as many computers as you have ports provided you
have a cable for each. The router will make sure that the machines can all share
the internet at the same time.
If your computers are in different rooms, WiFi is still completely
unnecessary. The best options for this is using two dLAN units (see FAQ above),
which can connect computers and laptops using the power circuitry in the
building. The units are plugged into a standard power socket on the wall, and
have a computer network port for attaching the laptop or computer to. Plug one
into a socket near your router (see our broadband FAQ
if you are unsure whether you have a router or what one is) and connect it to
the router with normal computer networking cable. The whole house should now be
connected to the network, and you can use the other dLAN unit in any room you
would like to use your laptop in - just plug it in, turn it on, and connect the
laptop via computer networking cable.
[Return to top]
Are games consoles safe?
Many games consoles, especially older ones, are no different to most other
standard household electronic goods and should not expose you to significant
levels of EMFs. The latest-generation consoles (XBOX 360, Nintendo Wii, Sony
Playstation 3) are all wirelessly enabled. These all have the capability to have
wireless controllers, and have either integrated or add-on WiFi. Some modern
handheld consoles (Nintendo DS, Sony PSP) also have WiFi built in.
There is currently no research either way on WiFi at the moment, however WiFi
enabled devices give off similar strength EMFs as an average Mobile Phone Mast
would give at under 100m. There is strong scientific evidence for mobile phone
masts causing a variety of serious health issues, so we consider it prudent to
take a precautionary approach and avoid prolonged use of WiFi enabled devices.
[Return to top]
Is it true that trains are all going to become WiFi enabled?
Many people who suffer from electrical sensitivity are finding it harder to
travel by train. Far from 'letting the train take the strain' they are
increasingly being excluded from access to public transport. One person told us
"I couldn't contemplate taking a train journey in a carriage offering
wireless internet facilities. I get headaches after 10 minutes of exposure to
radiofrequency radiation." She continues "electrosensitives will become
increasingly isolated from work places and public spaces."
Ten stations, Reading, Bristol Temple Meads, Bath Spa, Didcot Parkway,
Swindon, Exeter St Davids, Bristol Parkway, Plymouth, Newbury and Slough this
summer began to offer online internet access for use by business passengers
waiting for trains on platforms or in the waiting areas. There is a charge for
the service that may put off people wanting to use the system to watch video or
play games or music, but many may decide to use the system to pass the time.
First Great Western and First Great Western Link have signed a contract with
The Cloud to bring wireless Internet access to every one of its 85 stations.
Icomera, a Swedish company, is providing the commercial 3G Wi-Fi service used
on GNER's fleet of trains. They have been testing the system on GNERs East Coast
route and by May 2007, every GNER train will be fitted with the new wireless 3G
data communication system. All 13 diesel trains and 30 electric trains will have
the facilities of 'a mobile office'.
Virgin Voyager trains have already got a 'Connected Carriage' system offering
the same service and T-Mobile and Southern are providing a faster broadband
service.
[Return to top]
Housing and Wiring
What is the best way to wire a house to reduce electromagnetic fields in the home?
The current UK practice of wiring a house using 'ring' circuits can often
lead to high electric and magnetic fields. In Europe 'radial' or 'tree and branch'
wiring is more common than in the UK and these result in much lower levels of
EMFs in buildings. In addition, running wires in metal conduit will reduce the
fields to virtually zero. For new build homes this is the best option.
There are different types of screened cable available when running wires in
metal conduits is not possible:
Mineral insulated cables can be expensive to install, some are fire retardant
and are likely to need extra residual current devices or RCDs. There are
difficulties with some braided cables which need earthing at every junction
point, and some need extra space to allow for the necessary larger bending
requirement.
Most cables, including reasonably priced, flexible cable can be bought from
an electrical goods supplier, such as used by professional electricians. Very
competent DIYers can also re-wire houses, but it is important to remember that
it is now illegal for unqualified people to undertake major electrical work
without formal independent third-party inspection and test.
Our library article House electrical Installations and EMFs, has detailed information about the
different types of circuit, cable specifications and what type to use in which
situation, for the use of the competent DIYer, or professional electrician.
[Return to top]
Are there wall insulation materials that can stop incoming microwaves?
Some insulation materials that look like metallised plastic do screen against
microwaves, some do not! There are too many brands and types (models are changed
from time to time, which may well have different properties to the ones tested)
to be able to provide a definitive list of ones that do and ones that don't. You
often cannot tell by looking at them. The only way to find out for certain is to
measure the fields
with a suitable instrument before screening large areas.
[Return to top]
Other FAQs
Powerlines, substations and mobile phone base stations. How far away is safe?
This is a question we are often asked and, unfortunately, there is no easy
answer. The research into the health effects of electric and magnetic fields
(EMFs) from these structures has primarily focused on field levels rather then
distance.
The only way to know for sure whether you are in levels of EMF below those at
which health effects have been found, is to measure them. EMFields stock a
range of instruments
for sale and hire that can measure both ELF and RF electromagnetic fields.
Powerlines
Powerlines, which are part of the electricity distribution system, come in
various sizes (voltages) from 400 kilovolts (kV) (largest) to 230 volts
(smallest). On the whole, the higher the voltage of the line, the higher the
EMFs and the further you have to be away for the fields to drop away to a
background level. A significant exception to this is the 132kV lines, which can
carry very unbalanced power loads, which mean they have much higher EMFs than
you would expect from the size.
Electric fields have been less researched as they are stopped by most
building materials. However, we have found that about half of UK homes can have
high electric fields due to the way the house wiring is done.
Substations or transformers
Substations generate low frequency EMFs such as those which are found near
powerlines. Magnetic fields can extend out for some distance, depending on the
size of the substation and the type of demand for electricity that it supplies.
Underground cables run from the substation to the house, businesses, etc.
that it supplies. The cables give off very high levels of magnetic field close
by. This can be a particular problem for houses with small or no front gardens,
or where the cables pass near the garden.
The way that substations are connected can sometimes give rise to 'net'
currents which can produce very high fields indeed in the houses between them.
The electricity supply is unaffected and the electricity company does not
usually see the high fields as a problem.
Mobile phone masts or base stations
High frequency EMFs, or microwaves, are radiated from mobile phone masts. The
levels you may be exposed to depend on a number of factors: The number of
operators, the height of the base station, the power of the antennas, the
direction of the antennas and the type of buildings and building structures in
the immediate area.
It is impossible to determine the amount of exposure in any one place based
only on the distance to the nearest mast (or mast complex). The only way to find
out for certain is to measure the strength of the field in volts per metre.
[Return to top]
Why do I have high ambient levels of magnetic fields in my home?
If you have high levels of magnetic fields in your home that you cannot
easily pin down to electrical equipment, it may be due to faulty wiring or net
/ stray currents.
What are net currents?
Substations supplying an area with electricity are interconnected in a way
that is intended to ensure a constant voltage supply, to avoid equipment
malfunction. Some properties have high levels of magnetic fields as a result of
a fault or faults having developed in the supply cables between two substations.
This produces an unbalanced or net current.
The net current forms a loop between the substations and because it isn't
balanced out by a current in the opposite direction (as it would be in a single
cable carrying both 'go' and 'return' currents) then it can create quite high
EMFs over a wide area.
Magnetic fields coming into a property from outside are usually from
underground cables carrying the power supply from house to house, often running
under the pavement outside. If there is no front garden or the property is a
basement flat, the magnetic fields could be quite high even without net
currents, but should fall off rapidly as you move away from the cables by a
couple of metres.
If the magnetic field in a property is higher that usual (say above 0.1
microtesla) and is similarly high throughout the ground floor, the house is
likely to be within the net current loop, which can affect a few houses, or even
a few streets. If the field drops away slowly, as you move away from the source,
the property may be affected by the net current but not within the loop.
Net Currents and Stray Currents
Stray currents are net currents that have transferred to metal water or gas
pipes, or even to the Earth itself. In most UK areas the final electricity
circuits are connected as Protective Multiple Earth (PME) circuits. This
connects the Neutral conductor to Earth every hundred metres or so. Undetected
faults in the Neutral conductor lead to currents transferring to the Earth (damp
earth is a surprisingly good conductor), which then also 'takes rides on' any
underground metal pipework. The effects of raising EMF levels are similar to
simple Net currents but it is usually harder to locate the problem and cure the
fault.
Usual drop off distance from a supply source
With powerlines, magnetic fields reduce with the square of the distance. That
is, if you double the distance from the source, the magnetic field levels are
a quarter the strength.
From transformers (substations), the field levels will reduce to an eighth at
twice the distance. The fields from cables fall away somewhere between linear
(twice the distance, half the field level) and square (twice the distance,
one-quarter the level).
How do you know whether a property is affected by a net current?
Because net currents arise from an uncorrected distribution fault, they are
unpredictable. The only way to find out if a property is affected is by
measuring the magnetic field levels and determining whether they reduce as
predicted above, or whether they fall away very slowly, or hardly at all. The
last two instances mean that the property is likely to be affected by net
currents. Your decision as to whether to buy or rent such a property may be
affected by this discovery.
Responsibility of electricity supply companies
Electricity supply companies see their responsibility in terms of ensuring
power distribution at accepted voltage supply guidelines i.e. 230 volts +16% -
8%, rather than minimising electromagnetic field levels to customers. Therefore,
if a fault develops which results in net currents affecting some properties,
they usually do not feel the need to do anything.
Proving a Net Current problem
The electricity company needs to measure the net current around a supply
cable. The best way to do this is with a current meter that uses a Rogowski coil
sensor - a special open ended flexible pipe (like a hose pipe) that can be
wrapped loosely around a cable bundle to check if the net current is zero. See
ROCOIL Rogowski Coils Ltd for
more information.
If the underground cable is a 3 or 4 core composite cable a few (say 6)
centimetres in diameter, then a large jaw Clamp Ammeter can be used. These are
more commonly carried in the repair vehicles than Rogowski coil meters.
If they refuse to do this, then you need to plot the fall off of magnetic
field with distance to the cable using a suitable meter, such as the EMFields
Pro (EMFields hire and sell these). If the
EMF level falls off more slowly than with the square of the distance, then you
probably have some degree of net or stray current involvement.
The graph, below, assumes you measure 5 microtesla measured at 1 metre from
the source - you will have to scale it for other values of starting magnetic
field level. If it falls off at or below the thick middle line (square) then net
or stray currents are not a problem. The higher the readings are above this
line, the more net and stray currents are a part of the problem. If the readings
are above the top dotted line then it is likely that there are a number of stray
current problems in the area.
There is a caution with regard to these fall-off curves. If the starting
level at one metre away from the main source (e.g. the cables under the
pavement) is less than about 0.5 microtesla, then the fall-off will slow down
rapidly as in most residential areas there is a background level everywhere of
about 0.02 or 0.03 microtesla and the fall-off below about 0.05 microtesla will
be very slow.

[Return to top]
Do the benefits of cooking food by microwaves outweigh the potential disadvantages?
Good quality fruit, vegetables and whole grains contain all of the vitamins
and minerals essential for health. It is not only important to obtain good
quality food, but to cook it in a way that preserves its nutritional qualities
without causing harm.
The evidence is quite sparse with regard to the changes in food that result
from cooking using microwaves, but none of it is good news. Vitamins and amino
acids are changed, baby milk may be made toxic, and bacteria and microbes seem
to survive this way of heating food [1,2,3,4].
Some types of packaging and ways of 'crisping' the food, results in poisons
contaminating the food that may then be eaten [5].
There have been changes in the blood of people after they have eaten microwaved
food [6].
Microwave ovens give off EMFs at powerfreqency and microwave frequency. There
is more microwave radiation in a kitchen when an oven is working, than you will
be exposed to from your local mobile phone mast base station.
There is a more in-depth referenced analysis of the changes that have been
found in the article library.
References
[1] Food Additive Contamination June 2002
[2] Fox N, (1997) Spoiled: The Dangerous Truth About a Food Chain Gone
Haywire, Basic Books
[3] Lee L, (1989) Lancet, December (L), and Health Effects of Microwave
Radiation - Microwave ovens
[4] Watanabe F, Effects of Microwave Heating on the Loss of Vitamin
B(12) in Foods. Department of Food and Nutrition, Kochi Women's University,
Kochi 780, Japan, and Department of Applied Biological Chemistry,
Osaka Prefecture University, Sakai 593, Japan
[5] Nutrition Action Newsletter, Jan/Feb 1990
[6] Tom Valentine in Search for Health, Spring 1992
[Return to top]
Do EMFs present a problem for hearing aids?
The power used by hearing aids is very small, there are few mains-frequency
EMF problems associated with their use as far as we are aware. If switched to
inductive loop mode, hearing aids can buzz close to high power electricity
cables or transformers.
Hearing aids are often sensitive to microwaves, especially digital pulsing
ones such as are emitted by GSM mobile phones and base stations. These can cause
buzzing noises and a high pitched whine. Wireless Local Area computer networks
can cause clicking / scratching sounds, as can some 3G mobile phone systems. The
hearing aids should be protected by good design, but often aren't. It is a
defect in the hearing aid.
Older aids were particularly prone to these problems but some new models
still seem to have the problem.
Induction loops amplify sound for the hard of hearing in their own home for
watching TV, or in public places, like theatres, meeting rooms, etc. Sound is
amplified and transmitted using a large loop of wire wound around the room or
building. This sound cannot be heard directly but is picked up by a special loop
and receiver worn by the person who is hard of hearing, and fed to a hearing
aid. This induction loop system causes quite high levels of EMFs that change
continually with the broadcast sound. There is no scientific evidence of any
harm from EMFs generated by audio induction loops, and we are unaware of any
anecdotal evidence that suggests otherwise.
Infra-red systems work by transmitting the sound signal using an infra-red
beam, from the television or hi-fi to a head set worn by the person who is hard
of hearing. This use of infra-red light uses very low power and is free of any
electromagnetic hazard.
Microwave systems have a microwave transmitter attached to the television set
or hi-fi. The receiver is in the headset worn by the person listening. The
headsets are safe, but the transmitter gives off high fields. You should sit a
reasonable distance away from the transmitter unit.
[Return to top]
Are interactive whiteboards in classrooms an EMF problem?
Interactive whiteboards in classrooms can be a very valuable teaching and
learning tool.
From an EMF point of view, systems which are powered using wires are not a
problem at all.
There are other ways of powering the systems that we are not as happy with.
- The teacher has a console on the desk, and there is a WiFi connection
from the console to the whiteboard. Children have to use the teacher's
console to input information.
- Bluetooth systems work at very low power and extend to a range of about
30 foot maximum. This is a lot less powerful than the wireless LAN systems.
- A wireless Local Area Network (wLAN) system where the console or
consoles can travel around the class and be used by more than one person.
The following problems were identified by researchers looking at the effects
of exposure to low levels of microwaves. In most cases the exposure source was
a mobile phone mast, and the subjects were nearby residents; it is not clear how
long each day the subjects were exposed to the mast signals, compared with
potential classroom exposure. As interactive whiteboards are newer than mobile
phone masts, the studies have not yet been done, though the amount of exposure
may be similar in many cases.
Learning and memory problems (Freiburger 2002, Santini 2002, Navarro
2003, Oberfeld 2004, Abdel-Rassoul 2006) Concentration difficulties (Freiburger 2002,
Navarro 2003, Oberfeld 2004, Hutter 2006, Abdel-Rassoul 2006)
The school
study reported by Powerwatch showed that both parents and teachers were
concerned about "uncharacteristic behaviour" shown by pupils in a school which
had had a mast for nearly three years when compared with one without.
If you want to find out more about the health risks from microwaves, there is a very informative article 'Radiofrequency EMFs and Health Risks' in our article library.
[Return to top]
How do the different units of magnetic field measurement compare?
The most usual measure of magnetic flux in the UK is the microtesla. In the
US the Gauss is found more frequently.
m = milli, µ = micro, n = nano
| Nanotesla |
Microtesla |
Gauss |
| 1 nT |
0.001 µT |
10 µG |
| 10 nT |
0.01 µT |
0.1 mG |
| 100 nT |
0.1 µT |
1 mG |
| 1,000 nT |
1 µT |
10 mG |
| 10,000 nT |
10 µT |
100 mG |
[Return to top]
Are there any dangers from EMF based pest control devices?
Combined EMF and ultrasonic devices seem to be effective at keeping mice
away. There are questions about how effective the EMF ones are on their own,
without the ultrasonic component. They operate at VLF frequencies and we do not
know of any readily available instruments which measure this frequency.
They do give off an audible 'click' every few seconds in operation but, by
and large, it is unobtrusive. EMFs are very low, but we would not recommend
placing one of the units next to the bedhead in a bedroom or a chair which is
sat in for lengthy periods of time.
[Return to top]
|