The Potentially Detrimental Effects of Wi-Fi

Today’s article is sure to be controversial. This is why I want you to know right away that this is strictly an informational piece.

Research is, at best, lacking on this subject. Much more is needed.

But the results in the following study were alarming enough for me that I felt I needed to share it with you now.

Just within the last week, a study came out about the long term effects Wi-Fi has on the brain. Specifically, it focused on microRNAs (miRNAs).

MicroRNAs are small, non-coding RNA molecules that are present in every cell of the body. They control the expression of thousands of different genes within the body.

This study showed that Wi-Fi can affect the way a body functions.

In the experiment, scientists exposed lab rats to a 2.4 GHz radio frequency (RF) for one full year.

This level is most likely the same found in your home.

On the surface, a study like this seems unrealistic. Yet, consider how commonplace Wi-Fi is becoming in our society…

When you’re at home, the Wi-Fi is always on — including when you are sleeping. Most working environments have Wi-Fi now, which puts you in a Wi-Fi zone almost all day long.

What’s more, most of us never let our smartphones leave our sides. These produce a similar electromagnetic field every second.

Many of us remember our first microwave ovens. Then the studies started coming out about how those could make us sick if we stood too close to them.

Could our Wi-Fi have the potential to harm us, too?

Faster Wi-Fi, Slower Bodies?

MicroRNAs regulate gene activity. They are vital to the brain because they are responsible for a wide range of biological processes such as cell-cycle control and cell death.

(Cell death, or apoptosis, happens as cells mature and new cells develop.)

These miRNAs are also responsible for several developmental and physiological processes:

•  Stem cell differentiation

•  Blood cell production

•  Cardiac and skeletal muscle development

•  Neuron generation

•  Insulin secretion

•  Cholesterol metabolism

•  Immune responses, and

•  Viral replication.

Those seem mostly positive, right? Well these miRNAs have also been implicated in:

•  Aging

•  Reduced oxygen in body tissues

•  A broad range of cancers, heart disease and neurological diseases.

Getting back to the study …

After a year of exposure, some of the rats’ most important microRNAs were lowered by more than 3 times that of the control study.*

The Wi-Fi Connection

The mass use of Wi-Fi has only been around for the past decade. And while we really don’t know the effects it can have on the body long-term, this study gives us a potential starting point.

Here’s the takeaway from the study, which concluded with the following statement:

“Long term exposure of 2.4 GHz RF may lead to adverse effects such as neurodegenerative diseases originated from the alteration of some miRNAs expression and more studies should be devoted to the effects of RF radiation on miRNAs expression levels.”

You can find the full study here >>

After reading this, we will all draw our own conclusions. The one I believe we all share is that this is a very important subject that requires more study.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this subject. Please leave a comment on our website.

Happy and Healthy Investing,

Brad Hoppmann

* Clarification: This article has been updated to clarify that this statistic applied to the control group. Here is an excerpt from the study:.

“We observed that mir 107 expression is 3.3 times and miR-106b-5p expression is 3.65 times lower in the exposure group than in the control group.”

Your thoughts on “The Potentially Detrimental Effects of Wi-Fi”

  1. Brad Hoppmann,

    What is your email address?

    Excellent article. Thank you for bringing this to the attention of your readers.

    Are you aware that smart meters also produce harmful radiation? They do.

    Smart meters emit microwave and radio frequency radiation at levels thousands of times higher than scientifically know to be bioactive and cause biological effects. The international smart meter agenda, followed by most utilities and most state regulatory bodies and by the federal government, more or less requires smart meters regardless of health effects, regardless of consumer choice, and so on.
    Would you write an article about the health hazards of smart meter radiation?

    There are many resources. A few are:

    Here in Sacramento a group I belong to called Sacramento Smart Meter Awareness has been working on our municipal utility to help customers be aware of and choose whether to reduce their exposure to EMF and radiation. Here is a video of our comments at the latest Board meeting.

    We also recently wrote a letter to the editor that was printed in the Sacramento Bee. It’s the 3rd letter on this page.

    Best wishes
    Mark Graham

  2. This is what you get folks when you vote in Dumbocrats who want the nation to run headlong into the Agenda 21 which the cell phone radiation will dumb people down and disable the population so no resistance will happen.

    We are almost at Zero Hour for the end times which I think there is not going to be a rapture till midway thru which is why anybody who predicts a rapture is going to get eggs in their face.

  3. The EMF/EMR danger to biological life comes from all man-made electronic devices. To focus on one device or type is missing the issue. First, thanks to Terri for the websites. I have a few more at the bottom of this post. See the video: RESONANCE, Beings of Frequency (on VIMEO). Damage occurs a cellular and molecular level. Cancer appears and doctors can rarely pinpoint the exact cause. If the immune system is weakened by EMF on a continuous, but low level, there will be molecular breakdown and premature cell death in various parts of the body. And now, all cordless phones sold are DECT standard 6 Ghz and higher. The human body resonates at between 7-9 Hz. Not Megahertz, not Gigahertz. Hertz. The danger from all these devices is precisely this kind of constant exposure from multiple sources. But medical science will not be able to point to one culprit, like they did with cigarette smoking and lung cancer. My best two recommendations: An hour before sleeping, unplug the Wi-Fi router (not the modem, just the router), and put the smartphone in Airplane Mode, or turn it off completely. Thank you, Brad!
    And watch this video from Dr. Devra Davis, who presents the evidence:

  4. Hi Brad,

    Why don’t you re-publish and distribute this article under the title “Why Cut the Cord?”!
    Thanks for the insights.

    L. C. Miller

  5. With all the different frequency of radio TV, and cell phone, waves surrounding all of us we should all have some damage.

  6. Very important to follow the infant science here – as ancedotal as it may be – legal disclaimers are put on electrical gadgets for a reason. Hey Brad, check out the subject of “Grounding” – thats how its called in the US(Called earthing in the UK). It basically explores the science/difference between positive(sun) and negative(earth) electricity. It gives you the other side of this rf/wi-fi situation – you’ll be amazed. Google or check out, was re-discovered/stumbled upon by an electrician named Clint Ober – which he then has developed into a proven science.

  7. What is the proximity of the rats to the WiFi source? These studies usually don’t list it in the abstract, you must drill into the paper’s methods. Since I can’t find the actual paper, knowing the inverse square law would lead me to conjecture that the rats were very close to the source. If the rats were 4 units from the source, the strength of the EMF is 1/16th of being 1 unit from the source. At 8 units, 1/128th at 10 units, 1/512th, etc. To really know, the rats need to be set at 1, 4, 8 & 10 units from the source, for the aforementioned time frame. Also, what was the mean age of the rats as compared to their normal life expectancy? Do they relate to human adolescents, middle aged or seasoned citizens? without being able to parse the paper, we and only speculate. I suspect that this is just another fear mongering piece.

  8. The scientific evidence is becoming quite convincing that there are problems with prolonged exposure even to very low levels of RF radiation. A recent study is summarized by Microwave News, a well-respected newsletter, a study by Dr. Alex Lerchl who until recently believed harm could only be done if tissue heats. Now he sees that harm can be done at far lower levels, that these can promote cancer tumours.

  9. Thanks Brad for writing about EMF which most of the people are ignoring it, even in the medical community they turn a blind eye to it just because of convenience and we became addicted to all these hi tech gadgets.
    To me it is the most dangerous trend and environmental pollution we have ever seen,just because we do not smell it or see it does not mean we should continue with this craziness, and to me when you pay for some thing with your health then it is crazy and it is not sustainable. I could talk for ever about it and give an example that I witnessed in my family due to that and the medical community does not buy it….it will be a while before they admit it since it is a big business..
    Thanks ,
    Jay Srour,M.D.

  10. Downright scary! when I sit at my computer for six or eight hours a day at home the WIFI box is undderneath my desk – wonderful any suggestions!

  11. These “signal waves ” have been around for many years. Same effects from high tension power lines was found after many people dead, so now no homes are build within so many feet. Wifi is just a lesser signal but how long would it take for a person to have problems from wifi signals ?? One way to fight this problems is flood body with O2. Can anything in body live or do well inside body flooded with O2 ?? Cancer can not.

  12. So what do you do to protect yourself? There are “things” you can buy to put on your cell phones, routers, etc. There are “things” you can buy to put around your neck and wear. There are “generator type things” you can buy that will condition your house. You can wrap your smart electric meter with aluminum foil to help keep it from blasting your house.

    But does any of this stuff really work? Any info out there on that? Any way to check it to see if it works?

    Would like a lot more information !!!

  13. The same study authors also performed a similar study with 900Mhz signal that was well below the basic restrictions (ICNIRP 1998 Guidelines) with similar findings mi-R107 down regulation.
    Study title is “Long term and excessive use of 900 MHz radiofrequency radiation alter microRNA expression in brain.”

    When one look at the implications of down regulation of mi-R107 one finds that we find it gives cancers more opportunities to develop. Also Alzheimer’s features too i.e. miR107 regulates tumour invasion and metastasis. Expression of miR-107 decreases early in Alzheimer’s disease and may accelerate disease progression through regulation of beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (Wang et al., 2008).

  14. This was a informative article. The United States Government is run by lobby attorneys. Micro wave communications is a huge industry. This is why little research is actually available on radar frequency transmissions at a low scale. It has been informed that it comes down as a cone and by the time it reaches the earth from satellite. The intensity is diminished enough to cause no damage in radiation. No research on the effects being exponentially cumulative. It is a known fact that any serious burns from radar frequency radiation or micro wave RF can and dose cause serious and detrimental health issues, cancer is one, is leukemia and is well documented in some reports of the nineteen fifties. The rise in all forms of skin cancers could be from such radiation? Leading to more aggressive forms of cancer? No doubt cell phone and WFI communications is just the spread of a another radiation factor in the world and like alternating current was once deemed dangerous to all forms of life on the planet and is still considered to be so by some and there is some good argument for such danger and in this experiment as with communications, time will tell?

  15. Great insight and questions by many. My question is, what is the alternative. Americans are hooked on the Internet, tablets, iPads, IPhones,etc, as we are living in the information age and unwilling to give it up. SO, the only alternative I see is to build all the protection we can around us and our devices, AND, the technologists
    and inventors get busy to find the best solutions to these problems – right away.

  16. Here is why the BRICS nations are going to surpass the US in all areas:
    They know something we don’t

    The Cancer Association of South Africa (Cansa) has issued a stern warning: giving children cellphones and other wireless technology devices carries enormous risks.

    It would be great if we could interview a few of the ambassadors who worked in the Russian embassy during the Cold War, but, they are dead, from blood cancers.

  17. Interesting article–thank you for the heads up. Of course, as others have said, it must be a repeatable outcome, and it depends on how close the rats were to the frequencies. Still, I think it is wise to limit one’s exposure. The last 100 years or so has seen the advent of multiple changes to our diet, environment, etc that was not in our evolutionary history. Interesting that in a sense, we have all become lab rats, so to speak. To the best of my ability, I prefer to take charge of my own health and that includes an organic diet, exercise (my favorite is gardening), and being away from those sources of those frequencies more than I am near them. Admittedly, I don’t always do that, but it is my goal. The more progress I make in that goal, the healthier I am.

  18. A key concept in such research is “ecological validity.”

    It would be correct to say, “Coumadin is deadly.” In fact, coumadin is the primary ingredient in rat poisoning. If given to humans in the same dosage (mg/kg) as is given to rats in rat poisoning, humans would hemorrhage and die as well. But if you want to test the ecological validity of research showing that coumadin is deadly, you’d need to administer an equivalent dose (mg/kg) to rats as is prescribed for treating clotting disorders in humans. Using ecologically valid doseages, coumadin is reasonably safe.

    It can be shown that a lot of things are deadly or carcenogenic if given in massive doses to rats. I wonder if the WiFi signal to which the rats were exposed was at the same intensity as humans are exposed to in daily life. Somehow, I doubt it. Without ecological validity, research is… well, invalid.

  19. I have been shouting this for 2 years Ive also shared info to principal in forsyth mo school for they went all computers 2 years ago Common sense this is not good and they already know Just like cell phones brain cancer up 800% past decade but its not anything to do with phone useage Their so full of sh–t Just like chemtrailsand haarp electromagnetic radiation is killing us Wake up people

  20. Lowered 300% or 3,5 times?

    A quick look at the study itself reveals that the “over 300%” was just Brad´s mistake. It says that the miRNAS were lowered approximately 3,5 times.

    Here are the results:
    “The results revealed that long term exposure of 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi radiation can alter expression of some of the miRNAs such as miR-106b-5p (adjP* = 0,010) and miR-107 (adjP* = 0,005). We observed that mir 107 expression is 3.3 times and miR-106b-5p expression is 3.65 times lower in the exposure group than in the control group. However, miR-9-5p, miR-29a-3p and miR-125a-3p levels in brain were not altered.”

    Thank you Brad for bringing this issue up.


  21. First let’s get some frequencies/energies straight: FM radio transmission occurs around 0.1 GHz (lowest energy), WiFi transmissions are 2-5 GHz, and microwave transmissions are generally between 3-30 GHz, with most microwave ovens at the lower end. But when it comes to biological damage, radiation INTENSITY is key (like a loud voice is more annoying than a soft one). So this information is missing from the “study” cited, as are any details of the methodology used. And was this publication even refereed? To me this falls into the same category as “studies” which show the mercury in vaccines causes autism (oops, there is no mercury in said vaccine).

  22. The article on WiFi says the micro RNA were reduced by 300%. This is not possible, since if they go down 100%, there are none left. Inaccurate numerical quotes like this are quite common in articles today. Is this the result of new math?

  23. Once you rule out the IMPOSSIBLE, then all things are possible. I point to asbestos. For years it was used for many purposes. School heating systems had miles of asbestos covering the steam pipes. How many years did it take for us to learn of the hazards of asbestos? Now, lets look at electro-magnetic radiation. How many years will it take before we learn that WiFi is either safe, or, has serious implications for our bodies?
    Accelerated tests with rats and mice “might” give us some insight as to the harm to humans, or at the very least show that more extensive testing needs to be done. What is more alarming is the fact that in 20 years, as in the case of asbestos, “WE” may be the test rats and mice today !!!

  24. Check this report:
    “The task of the 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Report, Identification of Research Needs Relating to Adverse Health Effects of Wireless Communication, was to identify any inadequacies in the research upon which the current US Radiofrequency radiation (RF) safety guidelines are based. The NAS Report did indeed find numerous inadequacies in that research record. An inadequate research record results in safety regulations that fail to address all exposures encountered by the public. Based on the 2008 NAS findings it cannot be asserted that US RF safety policy protects all members of the public from all mechanisms of harm in all exposure scenarios.”

  25. Hey Brad, I have pointed this out once before, so I apologise for repeating myself. It is a mathimatical fact that nothing can be reduced by more than 100%. A thing can not be reduced by 300%, for example!

  26. I am a consultant who specializes in helping clients reduce their exposure to EMF radiation. I can tell you that there are clear and absolute health effects from wireless, or WiFi. This is an issue that is starting to get out into the public, and it’s good to see.

    Something to consider is that the radiation levels drop off with distance. So while there are “radiowaves” just about everywhere now, with a few basic steps we can greatly reduce the levels in our homes. So there is good news in this, as well as very concerning implications for our very tech-driven society.

    For more information, visit

  27. Dear Brad, thank you for this article, especially given the debacle that just unfolded with the New York Times article on wearable tech.

    Many Americans have no idea that other countries have RF exposure limits to protect against non-thermal impacts of RF exposures, ten to hundreds of times lower than the US, AND that the WHO declared RF a possible human carcinogen in 2011.

    Italy, the site of the vatican leukemia lawsuit, has RF limits in the single digits for microwatts/cm sq, while its 580 here.

    Our limits are the equivalent of going into the medicine cabinet and taking every medicine at an adult dose all at the same time, and giving them to an infant, child, pregnant woman, and immuno-compromised individual. There are three reasons why responsible investors should be paying attention to what you are saying:
    1. Health testimony for the wireless/utility smart grid partnership is coming from product defense firms gradient and exponent, professional mercenary liars.

    2. section 704 of the telecom act of 1996 – no safety testing

    3. In March 1976, the US Defense Intelligence Agency published an astounding report titled “Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (Radiowaves and Microwaves) – Eurasian Communist Countries.” The 34-page report analyzes numerous Soviet and Eastern bloc research studies that demonstrate a wide range of adverse biological effects caused by exposure to radio frequency radiation and microwaves.
    In its Summary on page vii, the report states:
    “If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions.”

    In the end, nations like Austria, Italy, India, China, Russia will not experience the health and environmental damages that the 5 eyes nations – Canada, Australia, New Zealand, US, and UK are unleashing. Nature has the final vote.

  28. Thanks for the piece about the potential effects of Wi-Fi. Useful to be aware of. BUT, you can’t lower something by more than 300%. At 100% lowering it’s gone. What did you mean?

  29. There is nothing in the abstract linked to by the article to indicate the level of intensity of the wifi signals the rats were exposed to. I suspect there is a huge difference in level-of-exposure based on how close you are to the transmitter. A few feet can make a big difference.

  30. It makes sense. If you read UN AGENDA 21, listen to Bill Gates (Mr. Vaccine), Bloomberg (Mr. victim disarmament) and Ted Turner, we need to have less people on the planet yesterday. UN AGENDA 21 calls for depopulating the world by 1/2 by 2050. They claim, it is necessary to save the planet.

    But not one of these billionaires is doing anything to stop real threats to life like: Governments (genocide) Pollution (plastic, chemical industries) and MDs. (Death By Medicine-Gary Null-Free pdf) 700,000 people per year, every year are killed by M.Ds and another 1 million + are seriously wounded.

    Hundreds of children die every week in the USA from psychotropic drug use (meds prescribed by over zealous greedy M.Ds) but not a peep. Why no outcry for against GMO foods which cause cancer and destroy human reproduction. Of all the plastics available, why did DuPont choose the ONE SINGLE FORM most harmful to the human body? DuPont was a member of the elite: Illuminati, Luciferian Society, Club of Rome, call it what you will.

    My point, this is on par with their plans. THEY need to kill us. Sounds harsh, but it is the plan. Unfamiliar? Better start doing more research and less channel surf. Sandy Hook, Aurora, Boston? ALL 100% orchestrated events. Scams. Doubt it? You haven’t seen the evidence. Youtube: WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT SANDY HOOK-NEW 2015 Documentary. Why all this? To disarm us. How does it tie into this article? Disarming us, is prior to killing us. microwaves, Wi-Fi-vaccines-GMOs, Chem trails all soft kill. Hard kill is coming.

  31. Yo Brad – you can’t “lower” anything by “300%” – it’s a mathematical impossibility.

  32. “A very important subject that requires more study”. Why is it that every time I read an article like this there is only the problem presented. Why don’t you have a solution or even an idea of what to do that might be looked at as a possible solution. It amazes me that we have all this technological advancements that are killing us on the installment plan. It’s not like there is a viable alternative to RF. I guess we could hard wire everything but then there would still be the issue of some electronic leakage from the wires or devices. So, what is the solution?

  33. Some people have known about this risk for many years! Aliens have been beaming these signals at us for over 50 years! People in the know have their aluminum foil headpieces on all the time! This is quite possibly the reason people in the USA are becoming so stupid! (grin)


  34. Curious to know if lower frequencies (e.g. below 500 MHz) have similar negative effects on mRNAs?

  35. Brad,
    For this old man there is not much concern in your reporting of this “latest scientific scare” study. Because:
    1- I’m old and probably won’t see my life shortened appreciably by these evil waves.
    2- I’m not too concerned about my kids and grandkids, because:
    a- The “study” was done by Government paid people who have no useful activity to occupy their overpaid time.
    b- There is absolutely NO WAY that anything can be reduced by more that 100% … let alone “more than 300%”.
    3- Old cowboys riding the range far from any likely 2.4 GHz radio frequency (RF) source tend to age much more rapidly than do people in cities.
    4- Maybe it is simply the way of all mankind to age and die. Regardless of scare tactics used by lotion, potion and drink/diet sellers, we will ALL get older. The effects of any one “studied” horror is different for everyone.
    5- This 2.4 GHz radio frequency (RF) scare is just one more in the continuing drama.

    But, it is fun.


  36. Thanks for sharing this, I cannot imagine our exposure to WiFi will be without radical long term consequences.

    However, I have some difficulty understanding your interpretation of the numbers: How can something that is existing be lowered by “more than 300%” when more than 100% would already render the matter non-existent?

  37. In your article you write…”some of the rats’ most important microRNAs were lowered by more than 300%.” Am I missing something? Are these rats from another dimension I’m not aware of? In my world, all of my microRNAs represent only 100% of those I have. Maybe they are borrowing a cup of microRNAs from a neighbouring rat? Please clarify before I start to smell a rat. Otherwise, enjoyed the piece.

  38. It seems very plausible that WiFi has major health implications. We have accepted its widespread use with little or no caution. When the industrial age fostered massive coal use many heralded its boon to mankind while it was only much later that the deadly aspects if its use was discovered. And asbestos was initially welcomed fot its great industrial benefit. Now we have introduced a new high tech age and associated gadgets with a similar lack if caution. So will there be a big price to to pay in human health as we rush into this? It sure fits our historical pattern. And let us not forget that our bodies function on constant electrical impulses. Lets be a lot more careful about impacting it in unknown ways.

  39. I have read a lot of material related to such a study, based on supporting information, I will venture to say, “there is most likely more truth to this study than anyone will admit to right now”.

    Thank you for your concern and warning.

  40. As a Cancer survivor we are NOT” PAYING” enough attention to our Indoor Living Environment.
    Stagnation of Air, because of sealing up of our windows and doors, has created a Environment of DEATH!
    Why is the Dead sea Dead? Water can only flow in. Why is the sea of Galilee full of Life? Because of the fact water flows in and out. The body has a built in system to breath in and out, we eat so to get our energy from food, another system of in and then out. This leads me to the developing of a system for the home, so Air can flow in and out, a antistagnation system so to bring a New Environment of LIFE. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

  41. This is a technology that doesn’t get much interest, but should. I’d be extremely interested in learning how to avoid, deter, and fix Wi-Fi dangers.

  42. Conclusion:
    Rats get older in a year.

    More radiation is needed, to see if we can get the rats to die sooner, so we can conclude whether aging was speeded up by the radiation, or stayed constant.

    Once we put enough radiation into a rat to cook it, aging will stop and cats will try to eat our cooked rats, making the anatomical study impossible because we’ll have cat shit to analyze, instead of rat body parts.

    By the way, the microwave oven in the conference room emits radiation at 2.4 Gigahertz, just like a WiFi.

    That’s the reason why the WiFi frequency requires no government permit in any nation. 2.4 Gigahertz is useless for long-range communications because it is the frequency best absorbed by water molecules and converted to heat. A few hundred feet through sticky Florida air and the signal from a WiFi is too weak to use. A few inches through a bowl of frozen peas, and the moisture in the frozen peas gives you HOT peas.

    Enjoy your lunch!

  43. This article only confirms suspicions I have long held about how our airwaves are saturated with man-made electromagnetic energy.

    For years I have wondered about commercial television and radio broadcasts, how all the energy their transmissions produce might affect the brain.

    As I understand it, the brain is basically a very sophisticated organ that coordinates the body’s many functions by the transmission of minute amounts of electrical charges in a chemical environment. Radio and television broadcasts can’t possibly do the brain any good, and it has always seemed plausible to me that they might be causing harm.

    Now we have the ubiquitous presence of WiFi on top of all this.

    It will be interesting to see if more research is in fact carried out, and if the results of such research are reported honestly; or if they are squashed and suppressed by the mainstream media like so many other important issues are.

  44. Thank you for sharing this information Brad… critical for all to know!. Just a few more helpful facts:

    1) Children are especially vulnerable to Wifi as their brains are developing. Belgium banned the sales of cellphones to children under age 8 last year… and European governments are considering removing Wifi from schools. More info on Facebook page “Campaign for Radiation Free Schools” and here:™/

    2) The pre-emininent medical study on 1800 documented health effects of wireless technology compiled by 24 MDs & PhDs is here, edited by Harvard educated David Carpenter MD:, .

    3) Wireless signals can be blocked out of your home using shielding materials and paints. This is best accomplished by working with a “Building Biologist” who’s trained in this speciality and can work with you long distance. Its recommended you do work with a Building Biologist as first detecting and eliminating stray electrical fields is a factor before blocking out the Wifi :

    4) There is SO much you can easily do on a daily basis to use Wifi more safely, excellent tips here:

    5) If you or anyone you know feels worse around wireless devices and cellphones, this is called Electrical Hyper-Sensitivity (EHS), and affects about 3% of the population. A lot of info on the web about this.

    Thanks so much again Brad and all the best, Terri

  45. Brad, I do really appreciate your bringing this potentially important topic to the forefront. However, the mathematical error gives me great pause about the study.
    There can be NO decrease of 300% in Anything !! The most any amount can be decreased is of course “all of it”, or 100%.
    So… how much was the decrease really, and is it significant or not??
    Thanks, and I hope you’ll be able to get an answer from the participants.
    John W

  46. There are two WiFi frequencies in common use. In addition to 2.4Ghz there is 5 Ghz. The majority of WiFi routers today provide both frequencies. Both are low power. The potential of negative affect on humans is pretty small. However, WiMax a more powerful form of WiFi could very well have health effects, but doubtful.

  47. I don’t understand how “After a year of exposure, some of the rats’ most important microRNAs were lowered by more than 300%.”. If ALL microRNAs were gone it would be a 100% loss. How can you lose more?

  48. Fascinating and scary. Clearly more research is needed, longitudinal and with human subjects

Comments are closed.