A brief Background history

A brief background history:

At some stage last year our local school  installed a high power WLAN system - we are unsure as to what date it was installed or went live.

Parents and the wider community were not consulted, or informed, about the installation of this wireless network.

We believe that this network was never installed to NZ Standards (2772.1:1999)

and did not conform to the guidelines issued by the Ministry of the Environment.

The school initially stated that the installation complied fully to New Zealand standards.

Now however their stance has changed considerably and insist "the installation complies to New Zealand Regulations"

There is a big difference for those people that have read the said New Zealand Standards - they are a lot stricter for a start.

The New Zealand Standard (2772.1:1999) insists that installers take more care to guard against A-thermal effects, the school are now referring to the

General Users Licence which insures automatic compliance with the New Zealand Standard if the power level is turned down to a minimum.

This automatic compliance means that A-thermal effects do not have to be taken into account.

We asked the school twice to turn the network off - they refused to do so on both occasions.

We have been made aware by a number of children experiencing headaches in term 4 of 2009

- these are caused by A-thermal, or non-thermal effects.

The school instruct The National Radiation Lab to test the network to see if it is 'safe';

 this is current practice and is recommended by the Ministry of Education - please note though that they

instruct the N.R.L. three month's after the system has been operating.

The N.R.L come down and test the school for THERMAL effects this is the heating effect of the non-ionising radiation

on the body, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the A-THERMAL effects.

Martin Gledhill from the N.R.L. carries out his testing and no where in his report does he state that the Wi-Fi is safe.  Instead (and he states this twice) that 'No adverse health effects are anticipated at such low exposures'.  To anticipate is to 'foresee' so how can Martin see into the future with regards to what this technology is doing to these children? 

Brain cancer is now the number .l killer cancer in children under the age of 14 in the U.S.A.

In January 2010 the W.H.O. release a document entitled 'Children and Cancer' and on page 13 non-ionizing radiation is classed as a physical carcinogen