Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

are wireless laptops dangerous?

Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
May 24, 2004 7:11:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
May 24, 2004 7:44:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Mon, 24 May 2004 15:11:51 -0700, jm wrote
(in article <c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218@posting.google.com>):

> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.

A decision you have to make for yourself. You'll find data to support both
conclusions: that it may be harmful, and that it may not be.

The majority of data that I've seen show that not enough studies have been
done to draw a conclusion. So while I can't say conclusively that the
technology is dangerous to human biology, I can't say that it's completely
benign, either.
--
DaveC
me@privacy.net
This is an invalid return address
Please reply in the news group
May 24, 2004 10:24:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm) wrote in news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218
@posting.google.com:

> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.

Not to sure about the effects of prolonged exposure to very small amounts
of RF energy, but....

I was working on the road deploying a private wireless network, and the
tower sites were leased from several different companies, so there was
other equipment at these sites as well. Some of the other gear was a few
kiloWatts, compared to the low power (4 watts) stuff I was deploying.

There was one particular site that I was inside the 20 x 40 foot building
working around all of this other equipment, and after about 30 minutes I
started to feel sick.... my nose started running, I began to become light-
headed. After an hour there, there was extreme nausea, and I felt like I
was really drunk, without the slurring speach (and w/o having all the fun
that usually precedes that end-of-the-night feeling). It was lunch-time, so
I left for lunch and in 20 minutes I felt fine again, which is when I made
the connection to the RF. I was getting paid to do a job, so I did go back,
to finish up what I was doing, but was out of there in 20 minutes.

Unless you're way out in the boonies, everone's getting bomarded anyway
with RF energy from all types of places like TV, radio, cell phones, CB's,
satellites, cordless phone's, microwave ovens, paging system's, trunking
radio system's, police and 911, airport and weather radar.....

Can 50 milliwatts of 2.4 GHz RF energy cause any damage to the human body ?

Maybe.



DS
Related resources
May 25, 2004 1:30:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

jm wrote:

> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.

While there may be debate about this, the simple answer is "No, it's not
dangerous." If it were, there'd be a lot of folks in this group who
would have roasted nuts, popped eyeballs, split infinitives and all
sorts of ills.

--
Not to mention the court systems would be clogged with 'lawsoots' about
radiation from laptops.
May 25, 2004 1:43:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Mon, 24 May 2004 18:30:39 -0700, Rôgêr wrote
(in article <CqqdnSkFidArPC_dRVn-hg@pghconnect.com>):

> While there may be debate about this, the simple answer is "No, it's not
> dangerous." If it were, there'd be a lot of folks in this group who
> would have roasted nuts, popped eyeballs, split infinitives and all
> sorts of ills.

Cataracts, memory problems, trouble with mental acuity, weak immune systems,
and poor health in general?
--
DaveC
me@privacy.net
This is an invalid return address
Please reply in the news group
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 3:21:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 05/24/04 09:30 pm Rôgêr put fingers to keyboard and launched the
following message into cyberspace:

>> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
>> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
>> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
>> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
>> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.

> While there may be debate about this, the simple answer is "No, it's not
> dangerous." If it were, there'd be a lot of folks in this group who
> would have roasted nuts, popped eyeballs, split infinitives and all
> sorts of ills.

So that's why correct grammar is so difficult to find these days! I bet
you that the increase in RF radiation is the cause of the abominable
spelling too.

MB
May 25, 2004 3:26:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Minnie Bannister wrote:

> On 05/24/04 09:30 pm Rôgêr put fingers to keyboard and launched the
> following message into cyberspace:
>
>>> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
>>> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
>>> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
>>> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
>>> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
>
>
>> While there may be debate about this, the simple answer is "No, it's
>> not dangerous." If it were, there'd be a lot of folks in this group
>> who would have roasted nuts, popped eyeballs, split infinitives and
>> all sorts of ills.
>
>
> So that's why correct grammar is so difficult to find these days! I bet
> you that the increase in RF radiation is the cause of the abominable
> spelling too.
>
> MB

This was posted in 24hoursupport.helpdesk by Toolman Tim tonight:

THE PAOMNNEHAL PWEOR OF THE HMUAN MNID

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in
waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht
the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl
mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the
huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh?

(Eplaixns smoe of the pstos on tihs gourp)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 4:08:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Using your mobile phone or sticking your head next to your microwave oven is
more dangerous.

The power levels are extremely low - people have a tendency to demonize new
technology, especially if there's an aerial involved.



"jm" <john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218@posting.google.com...
> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
May 25, 2004 4:30:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

jm <john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user?

Studies of institutes of high reputation have proven this to be very
dangerous. I know one study that has followed people using these type of
laptops for over 5 years and they found that in this group there were
significant more people that developed serious mental deficiencies. Also
there were quite a number of cases of people experiencing suicidal
tendencies.

My advice to you? Get rid of this device immediately, don't even take
the risk of first saving your data!

--
Groeten,

Antonio (Voor email, verwijder X)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 6:41:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

I keep reading keep that card eight inches away from body parts.
I have noticed the numbers on my watch are still brightly glowing at 6am and
my card is on the wrist watch side of the laptop. I do have two callous
like bumps on my judo chopper but they might just be some kind of new diet
soda induced psoriasis. Man I'm thirsty all the time lately.

"jm" <john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218@posting.google.com...
> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 6:48:26 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Enviromental whackos and scare mongers would like you to believe there is,
but MANY tests have failed to detect and damage at all. Some tests have
purported to do so but upon careful investigation you find one of two
things - The tests were not done correctly - or you can't find out how they
were done (very convenient).

On Mon, 24 May 2004 21:43:15 -0700, DaveC <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 24 May 2004 18:30:39 -0700, Rôgêr wrote
>(in article <CqqdnSkFidArPC_dRVn-hg@pghconnect.com>):
>
>> While there may be debate about this, the simple answer is "No, it's not
>> dangerous." If it were, there'd be a lot of folks in this group who
>> would have roasted nuts, popped eyeballs, split infinitives and all
>> sorts of ills.
>
>Cataracts, memory problems, trouble with mental acuity, weak immune systems,
>and poor health in general?
May 25, 2004 1:37:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Tue, 25 May 2004 00:08:17 +0100, "K. Bibis" <kbibis@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Using your mobile phone or sticking your head next to your microwave oven is
>more dangerous.
>
>The power levels are extremely low - people have a tendency to demonize new
>technology, especially if there's an aerial involved.

How can you say using your cell phone is more dangerous than wi-fi ? The
power is nearly the same. More at the AP. Don't forget to consider the freq
differences as well.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 2:53:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 05/25/04 02:48 am NoSpam@anywhere.com put fingers to keyboard and
launched the following message into cyberspace:

> Enviromental whackos and scare mongers would like you to believe there is,
> but MANY tests have failed to detect and damage at all. Some tests have
> purported to do so but upon careful investigation you find one of two
> things - The tests were not done correctly - or you can't find out how they
> were done (very convenient).

And you could probably say the same for many of the tests that purport
to find *no* damage.

MB
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 6:33:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

DS wrote:

> john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm) wrote in news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218
> @posting.google.com:
>
>
>>I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
>>the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
>>machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
>>facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
>>pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
>
>
> Not to sure about the effects of prolonged exposure to very small amounts
> of RF energy, but....
>
> I was working on the road deploying a private wireless network, and the
> tower sites were leased from several different companies, so there was
> other equipment at these sites as well. Some of the other gear was a few
> kiloWatts, compared to the low power (4 watts) stuff I was deploying.
>
> There was one particular site that I was inside the 20 x 40 foot building
> working around all of this other equipment, and after about 30 minutes I
> started to feel sick.... my nose started running, I began to become light-
> headed. After an hour there, there was extreme nausea, and I felt like I
> was really drunk, without the slurring speach (and w/o having all the fun
> that usually precedes that end-of-the-night feeling). It was lunch-time, so
> I left for lunch and in 20 minutes I felt fine again, which is when I made
> the connection to the RF. I was getting paid to do a job, so I did go back,
> to finish up what I was doing, but was out of there in 20 minutes.
>
> Unless you're way out in the boonies, everone's getting bomarded anyway
> with RF energy from all types of places like TV, radio, cell phones, CB's,
> satellites, cordless phone's, microwave ovens, paging system's, trunking
> radio system's, police and 911, airport and weather radar.....
>
> Can 50 milliwatts of 2.4 GHz RF energy cause any damage to the human body ?
>
> Maybe.
>
>
>
> DS

That is a well-known problem inside buildings with neon signs for "Bud".

And, paint and other chemical fumes can do the same; I once got kinda
high painting in a confined space (specifically, the chain locker). There
have been many cases of sick building syndrome caused by new carpet. And,
don't forget Legionaire's disease. My point is that the first suspect
in your sick building should not be RF, when there are lots of other
possible causes.
--
Cheers, Bob
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 6:55:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 25/5/04 2:37 pm, in article ssi6b0p6d6oakk1o9tg1antf2h13cu0tkt@4ax.com,
"Mark" <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 May 2004 00:08:17 +0100, "K. Bibis" <kbibis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Using your mobile phone or sticking your head next to your microwave oven is
>> more dangerous.
>>
>> The power levels are extremely low - people have a tendency to demonize new
>> technology, especially if there's an aerial involved.
>
> How can you say using your cell phone is more dangerous than wi-fi ? The
> power is nearly the same. More at the AP. Don't forget to consider the freq
> differences as well.

All laptops are dangerous if you drop them from a great height on someone's
head.

By implication you seem to think WiFi and Mobile base stations are similar ?

Define "power nearly the same"

100mW for a WiFi AP and 1W peak for a GSM900 handset are not even similar.
One is continuously transmitting and another is in burst mode, with a low
duty cycle. The difference in power output is a lot more then x10

As to frequency difference, what do you conclude ?

2.4GHz cell size is tiny (less than 100m normally) so it must have less
power at any given distance from the AP - so unless the AP transmitted
radiation doesn't obey the universal inverse square law (probably unlikely)
its transmitting a lot less power.

Since when do you stick an AP to your head while using it ? Or put your
laptop on your head while using it.

The situations are totally different, in frequency, power output, and
physical relationships.

IMO, the only thing we can be sure about is that tests on mobiles are not
relevant to WiFi , and that to every set of data you'll find an expert on
both sides with differing conclusion.

Make up your own mind - do I want to use it or not ?

If it was unhealthy, bad for the environment, potentially dangerous with
long term detrimental effects for all of us, it would be Taxed ......
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 25, 2004 7:20:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Taking a moment's reflection, DS mused:
|
| Not to sure about the effects of prolonged exposure to very small amounts
| of RF energy, but....

Yeah, forget what the sun exposes us to on a daily bases. :-p
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 26, 2004 2:10:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Graham summed it up.
I was referring to power and the fact your mobile is closer to your brain
cells than your WiFi aerial.


"Mark" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:ssi6b0p6d6oakk1o9tg1antf2h13cu0tkt@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 00:08:17 +0100, "K. Bibis" <kbibis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Using your mobile phone or sticking your head next to your microwave oven
is
> >more dangerous.
> >
> >The power levels are extremely low - people have a tendency to demonize
new
> >technology, especially if there's an aerial involved.
>
> How can you say using your cell phone is more dangerous than wi-fi ? The
> power is nearly the same. More at the AP. Don't forget to consider the
freq
> differences as well.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 26, 2004 2:10:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

wifi laptop radio is usually pretty close to all of your unborn childs
cells.

"K. Bibis" <kbibis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CwPsc.475$Kz5.118@newsfe6-gui.server.ntli.net...
> Graham summed it up.
> I was referring to power and the fact your mobile is closer to your brain
> cells than your WiFi aerial.
>
>
> "Mark" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:ssi6b0p6d6oakk1o9tg1antf2h13cu0tkt@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 25 May 2004 00:08:17 +0100, "K. Bibis" <kbibis@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > >Using your mobile phone or sticking your head next to your microwave
oven
> is
> > >more dangerous.
> > >
> > >The power levels are extremely low - people have a tendency to demonize
> new
> > >technology, especially if there's an aerial involved.
> >
> > How can you say using your cell phone is more dangerous than wi-fi ?
The
> > power is nearly the same. More at the AP. Don't forget to consider the
> freq
> > differences as well.
>
>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 26, 2004 11:27:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Are you sure this was the antenna poking out from the laptop and not the
other way around?
Which direction is this thing pointed?
What is on the laptop screen?

"jm" <john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218@posting.google.com...
> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
May 27, 2004 1:03:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"Harold Starr" <dd@sodfa.net> wrote in message news:<SZqdnbjw_ai0BindRVn-vA@comcast.com>...
> Are you sure this was the antenna poking out from the laptop and not the
> other way around?
> Which direction is this thing pointed?
> What is on the laptop screen?
>
> "jm" <john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218@posting.google.com...
> > I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> > the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> > machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> > facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> > pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.

Yeah, I am sure it is the antenna. It is right where the Ir port is.
Right next to it Acer C100 Travelmate. It *always* pointing at the
user because it is at the keyboard bottom next to where the mousepad
is. Laptop screen? I guess you were joking...
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 27, 2004 5:34:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Cellular phones have a typical power of 2 watts (up to 8 watts in cars).
Wifi ranges from 100 to 200 milliwatts... so lower power (also lower
range)

--
Interested in mobile mesh ?
http://mark.cabiling.free.fr/mobilemesh/

Mark wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 00:08:17 +0100, "K. Bibis" <kbibis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Using your mobile phone or sticking your head next to your microwave oven is
>>more dangerous.
>>
>>The power levels are extremely low - people have a tendency to demonize new
>>technology, especially if there's an aerial involved.
>
>
> How can you say using your cell phone is more dangerous than wi-fi ? The
> power is nearly the same. More at the AP. Don't forget to consider the freq
> differences as well.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 28, 2004 1:15:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 27/5/04 12:34 am, in article 40b52960$0$12752$636a15ce@news.free.fr,
"Mark Cabiling" <mark.cabiling@gmail.com> wrote:

> Cellular phones have a typical power of 2 watts (up to 8 watts in cars).
> Wifi ranges from 100 to 200 milliwatts... so lower power (also lower
> range)
>
> --
2 Watts peak = 0.25Watts average ....
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 28, 2004 1:19:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 25/5/04 10:40 pm, in article j3Psc.50$XN2.8@nwrddc03.gnilink.net,
"bumtracks" <user@unknown.org> wrote:

> wifi laptop radio is usually pretty close to all of your unborn childs
> cells.
>
My wife will be very surprised I'm pregnant then ...

Keep taking the tablets !
May 28, 2004 4:22:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Graham in Melton <nota@nospamplease.net> wrote:

> Keep taking the tablets !

Indeed. Apparently there has been a breakout of some lunatic asylum!



--
Groeten,

Antonio (Voor email, verwijder X)
May 28, 2004 8:01:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

In article <BuJsc.4583$eT4.2832@attbi_s54>, "mhicaoidh" <®êmõvé_mhic_aoidh@hotÑîXmailŠPäM.com> wrote:
>Taking a moment's reflection, DS mused:
>|
>| Not to sure about the effects of prolonged exposure to very small amounts
>| of RF energy, but....
>
> Yeah, forget what the sun exposes us to on a daily bases. :-p

If I'm not mistaken, people die daily from over exposure to the sun. Is
you statement therefore inteneded to make us feel better?

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 29, 2004 2:27:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Taking a moment's reflection, Rico mused:
|
| If I'm not mistaken, people die daily from over exposure to the sun. Is
| you statement therefore inteneded to make us feel better?

No. It is intended to bring some perspective into the discussion. The
sun subjects us to far more RF waves than does a wireless NIC in a laptop.
Most people *still* don't think twice about spending hours in the sun
without some amount of SPF lotion. So, why worry about a laptop ... it's
not like it's a radar gun.
May 29, 2004 1:04:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

jm wrote:

> I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.

It depends on what picture the laptop is showing

If the antenea has sharp edges the user can seriously cut
himself.

>>I was referring to power and the fact your mobile is
>> closer to your brain cells than your WiFi aerial.

Blonds have no problem then.

regards
hans
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 29, 2004 3:28:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"Rôgêr" <abuse@your.isp.com> wrote in message
news:CqqdnSkFidArPC_dRVn-hg@pghconnect.com...
> jm wrote:
>
> > I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> > the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> > machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> > facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> > pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
>
> While there may be debate about this, the simple answer is "No, it's not
> dangerous." If it were, there'd be a lot of folks in this group who
> would have roasted nuts, popped eyeballs, split infinitives and all
> sorts of ills.
>
> --
> Not to mention the court systems would be clogged with 'lawsoots' about
> radiation from laptops.

There is still time :-) The lawyer haven't awakend yet.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 31, 2004 3:13:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm) wrote in message news:<c67e4bdd.0405262003.184d093@posting.google.com>...
> "Harold Starr" <dd@sodfa.net> wrote in message news:<SZqdnbjw_ai0BindRVn-vA@comcast.com>...
> > Are you sure this was the antenna poking out from the laptop and not the
> > other way around?
> > Which direction is this thing pointed?
> > What is on the laptop screen?
> >
> > "jm" <john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:c67e4bdd.0405241411.71995218@posting.google.com...
> > > I have a wireless notebook that has the antenna right at the edge of
> > > the PC that faces the user (next to the mouse at the edge of the
> > > machine). It is a c100 travelmate acer. Is this dangerous that it is
> > > facing directly at the user? Sometimes the antenna is directly
> > > pressed up against the user who is holding it in his lap. Thank you.
>
> Yeah, I am sure it is the antenna. It is right where the Ir port is.
> Right next to it Acer C100 Travelmate. It *always* pointing at the
> user because it is at the keyboard bottom next to where the mousepad
> is. Laptop screen? I guess you were joking...


Antennas typically are dipoles or folded dipoles and they radiate
more in a direction perpendicular to the antenna than in the
direction the antenna is pointing. So, if you can see the entire length
of the antenna, you are getting as much exposure as you likely can
(to the head).

If you are looking at the antenna as though it were the barrel of a gun,
your exposure probably is minimal (to the head).

Even though the power is low, it probably is a good idea not to
let the antenna touch you. The farther away you are, the better.

The UK NRPB at http://www.nrpb.org/radiation_topics/emf/wlans.htm
points out that there is no way to be sure a WiFi dose is
within safe limits if the antenna is in the lap.

Even though the power is low, exposure depends on the irradiation
of tissue, and if all of 100 mW is absorbed in a small
volume of tissue, the 100 mW might exceed US FCC limits.

John
jwill@AstraGate.net
John Michael Williams
!