Ban mobile phones and wireless networks in schools, say European leaders

[Ghost Dog]

Source: Telegraph

A Council of Europe committee examined evidence that the technologies have "potentially harmful" effects on humans, and concluded that immediate action was required to protect children.

In a report, the committee said it was crucial to avoid repeating the mistakes made when public health officials were slow to recognise the dangers of asbestos, tobacco smoking and lead in petrol.

The report also highlighted the potential health risks of cordless telephones and baby monitors, which rely on similar technology and are widely used in British homes.

Fears have been raised that electromagnetic radiation emitted by wireless devices can cause cancers and affect the developing brain.

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mobile-phones/8514380/Ban-mobile-phones-and-wireless-networks-in-schools-say-European-leaders.html

---

This is a political committee, composed of 84 MPs and politicians from 47 member states.

[melm00se]

1. and encase the school

in a Faraday cage

[boppers]

6. Faraday cage isn't enough.

Maybe if schools were sealed in lead painted classrooms...

Oh, wait.

[jonthebru]

32. Where I work we are encased in a Faraday cage.

Cell phone and wireless is essentially cut off. Of course that gets you away from your desk for a few minutes during the call to inhale some fresh air...

[iamtechus]

2. Aside from the possible physical harm from such devices ...

... it is highly desireable that "developing brains" be allowed to focus on school life.

It is easy to jam cell phones and wireless networks in a building but it might require legislation to allow it.

http://www.chinavasion.com/product_info.php/pName/mobile-phone-signal-jammer-high-powered-cellphone-jamming/

edited to add link.

[dipsydoodle]

5. Surely

jamming devices would come under the same umbrella ?

[iamtechus]

7. I assume that you refer to possible harm from jamming devices (?)

The harm from cell phones is caused by having the phone against one's head. The strength of the harmful radio frequency signal from the phone decreases exonentially with the distance of the phone from the head. The strength of the jamming signals are no stronger than those emitted by other electronic devices in our environment.

Actually, there is some controversy concerning the assumption that the phones themselves are harmful. I for one feel that there is good reason to suspect that they do cause some harm and perhaps we should take precautions to protect ourselves until we know for sure.

[dipsydoodle]

8. and I for one

am totally unable to understand why mobile phones were allowed in schools in the first place.

[Shanti Mama]

13. I used to feel this way, but now rely heavily on them

My kids aren't allowed to use the phones except during lunch and before/after school. We coordinate plans with text messages and it has helped us a lot. Less "I said, you said", more clarity, less stress.

[Donnachaidh]

19. so send your text messages before and after school hours

You'd rather your kids not pay attention in school because *you* want to discuss plans? Sure, let's distract kids from training for their future because you need to coordinate who is going to the movies, etc.

"My kids aren't allowed to use the phones except during lunch and before/after school."

Tell me -- what exactly are you texting on? a *phone*, right? Try a little consistency with rules by following them yourself.

unbelievable. :eyes:

[adigal]

33. We don't allow cell phone use during school

and kids are always breaking the rules, and getting texts from their parents. I take their phones for the day. In a emergency, the parent can call the office. They need to pay attention and learn, not be answering texts from parents about after-school plans.

Sigh.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. However, the report wants wireless computing banned in schools too

so it's about more than having a phone against your head. The jamming signals would come under the same precautionary principle they're invoking.

[dipsydoodle]

14. Out of curiousity

how did you manage at school without a mobile and access to Wi-Fi ? I know I managed just fine and without a calculator too....lol.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. However, societies do change

and most teenagers (and younger) in developed countries regard mobile phones as an essential part of their life. They'll kick up a storm if you tell them "we don't know, but perhaps mobile phones are bad for you children, so you can't use them anywhere in schools".

[fedsron2us]

18. Wireless networks dont have well defined boundaries

If you were to search for them from any public building in a built up area you would almost certainly pick up many active systems so turning it off within the school alone would hardly minimise the supposed 'risk' from them.

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. Yes, and I was wondering about what happens in houses close to each other?

If you had a home wireless network, and share a wall in a semi or terraced house with another, that has children in it (or even detached houses that are sufficiently close), would you have to switch it off?

[skepticscott]

15. Well, actually no

There is no good reason or evidence to suspect that cell phones use causes brain cancer.

And even if cell phone radiation were capable of causing the type of cell/DNA damage that leads to cancer (and it isn't...not remotely), why is nobody reporting skin cancer from having the phones jammed against their head? The skin is closer to the phone than the brain, right?

[Downwinder]

3. But keep all of the nuclear plants and build more.

[aquart]

4. How utterly dismissive.

Don't do anything because you can't do everything. Well, nobody can. And if you want to concentrate on getting rid of nuclear power, YOU GO DO IT. But try not to disrespect the sincere efforts of others to do other useful and important things.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

25. And don't forget about all those 1,000+ Volt powerlines everywhere.

They effect the body too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. 'European leaders' is a bit of an exaggeration

It's a committee of the Council of Europe. The members from the UK are very minor MPs, apart from Prescott, who has retired as an MP. Maybe those in other parts of Europe can comment on the 'leadership' status of others.

The report from the Council of Europe may influence the EU parliament a bit; but I think the claim that it is "highly influential in policy-making" is pushing it.

[itsrobert]

24. Exactly. The cell providers have bigger influence

Money talks.

[IamK]

11. redemption for the tin foil hat crowd...

they were just ahead of their time...

[xchrom]

12. Recommend

[fasttense]

17. Well, you all know why they want to stop students from communicating with each other

don't you?

Because they can organize protests through these devices.

Stop the cell phones, stop the twitters, stop the face book groups and you have less organizing by students and less information sharing.

Expect the Koch brothers to support this soon.

[Donnachaidh]

20. how about something even simpler -- like cheating on exams?

Yeah, those third graders building up flashmobs against the Koch Brothers are the cause of this. Nothing at all to do with potential health problems cited in the piece...

Too sad to even laugh at the silliness....

[skepticscott]

22. And is organizing protests

what they should be spending their school time on? Sheesh, most of them can't even compose a coherent paragraph and you want them to focus on stumping for social justice?

In any case, what stops them from organizing protests in off-school hours? Nothing.

[KittyWampus]

30. What? Children cease to exist after they get out of school? This is in schools, not every

moment of the kids' life.

I'd say ban mobile phone use, but for the simple reason that children/teens can't stop themselves from abusing them.

[FLPanhandle]

23. Just another "we must protect the little children" law

If technology is harmful, then the children spend far more time at home...ban all wireless technologies in homes with children if they are so concerned.

Here's the thing. Either the technology is that harmful or it is statistically benign. If it's that harmful, then start banning the devices. Targeting only schools where the kids spend a small fraction of their time is stupid.

[ileus]

26. Cellphones kill people....

[Kitsune]

27. Oh god, not this woo again.

[FLPanhandle]

28. It is all woo.

The article provided at least some rational data to counteract the panic & fear of "the new thing we didn't grow up with so it must be dangerous"...

"The conclusions contradict advice from the World Health Organisation and the Department of Health, which says exposure to electromagnetic fields poses little or no risk to human health."

"A report by Britain's Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme in 2007 said that there was no association between mobile phones and adverse health effects"

“There is very little evidence at the moment for harmful effects. The powers that mobile phones emit are getting less and less, and they are well below the limits set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection"


It wont stop those who believe without any data though.

[guyton]

29. "potentially harmful"

This is just more FUD and grandstanding by people who haven't a clue but are looking to score political points.

If they really thought cell phones / wireless networks were actually harmful, do you think they'd limit the ban to schools?

It makes about as much sense as banning drinking water from schools because it's "potentially harmful" until they test it for pathogens. And ... and ... even pure water can kill you!

"Fears have been raised" ... yes indeed, politics by fear. Same old story. Where have we heard this before?

[Odin2005]

31. Hysterical luddite BS!

[Blue_Tires]

34. strange...

I could almost understand the "We're trying to stop cheating/classroom distraction/sexual harassment" angles, but the 'health' angle just sounds weird...

[dickthegrouch]

35. You can't mention sex and children in the same sentence

It corrupts them. :sarcasm: Therefore you have to make up some ridiculous proxy.
Never mind that they are watching so much sex on TV and the internet that the poor little dears are hopelessly irredeemable in the first place.