The Inquirer

Wi-Fi sensitivity could result in disability pay

Back to Article
Back to Article

Wi-Fi sensitivity could result in disability pay

Wes Ihezue

Wes Ihezue

Wes Ihezue

Sarah Carr, Staff member

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Being “allergic” to Wi-Fi has been a controversial topic for years, but just now has made it to court.

A woman in France named Marine Richard was granted monthly disability payments every month for claiming to be sick from Wi-Fi, according to the Independent. Electromagnetic hyper-sensitivity is a condition some people diagnose themselves claiming physical illness occurs as a result of exposure to wireless networks. This condition is poorly researched in the medical field, but is gaining momentum toward being recognized as a legitimate illness.

Electromagnetic fields have been a part of planet Earth since its formation. The northern lights are a good example of this. But modern technology’s omnipresence has caused many people in many different countries to report symptoms of headache, nausea, and even depression when exposed to strong electromagnetic fields. This includes being around cell phones, power lines, televisions, Wi-Fi, and pretty much anything else that sends out electromagnetic waves.

Marine Richard won her case in court and now receives close to $900 for claiming she cannot return to work when she is constantly falling ill from the electromagnetic exposure at her job. Her case has already sparked a lawsuit in the US. On Aug. 12 in Massachusetts, two parents sued for $250,000 after their son’s school installed Wi-Fi that apparently made him develop rashes, nosebleeds, and dizziness.

On top of the ridiculous amounts of “compensation” that are being asked for in court, there are even people who are moving to the middle of nowhere to get away from electromagnetic fields. The same woman who won her disability case in France claims to have moved into a barn in the more remote regions of France to get away from Wi-Fi. She says her case is a “breakthrough” for people who experience EHS.

Few, if any, studies have been conducted supporting the idea that Wi-Fi exposure can lead to illness. The fact that most of the symptoms related to EHS are symptoms that people experience during stress, is beside the point. Electromagnetic sensitivity is a fantasy illness, one that never should have made it past Facebook comment threads. Unfortunately, it’s being taken seriously enough to actually be a reason to get disability checks. The reality is that more people report to have EHS every day, and before moving out to caves and barns, are filing lawsuits on their way out.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

8 Responses to “Wi-Fi sensitivity could result in disability pay”

  1. Dave Ashton on September 30th, 2015 11:17 am

    Well, there’s nothing like a balanced, informed article. And this is nothing like a balanced, informed article.

    You somehow omit to mention the International EMF Scientist Appeal, now signed by 206 scientists who specialise in studying the biological effects of microwave radiation, and sent to the UN, all UN member states, and the World Health Organisation.

    I suspect that they may know more about electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) than even the writer of this piece, and in their Appeal, they call for the following (note point 6):

    1.children and pregnant women be protected;
    2.guidelines and regulatory standards be strengthened;
    3.manufacturers be encouraged to develop safer technology;
    4.utilities responsible for the generation, transmission, distribution, and monitoring of electricity maintain adequate power quality and ensure proper electrical wiring to minimize harmful ground current;
    5.the public be fully informed about the potential health risks from electromagnetic energy and taught harm reduction strategies;
    6.medical professionals be educated about the biological effects of electromagnetic energy and be provided training on treatment of patients with electromagnetic sensitivity;
    7.governments fund training and research on electromagnetic fields and health that is independent of industry and mandate industry cooperation with researchers; disclose experts’ financial relationships with industry when citing their opinions regarding health and safety aspects of EMF-emitting technologies; and
    9.white-zones (radiation-free areas) be established. (1)

    The ex Director General of the World Health Organisation, Gro Harlem Brundtland, has recently given an interview in which she speaks about her own electrosensitivity, in which she explicitly links the condition to wireless devices. Do you say that she is fantasizing? (2)

    A group of international scientists and health practitioners recently issued the 5th Paris Appeal Congress Declaration on EHS and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, in which they called for the conditions to be added to the International Classification of Diseases. (3)

    Lennart Hardell, the acclaimed Swedish oncologist and researcher, whose work was instrumental in IARC’s classification of RF radiation from wireless technologies as a possible carcinogen in 2011, has recently published a paper with two colleagues in which they conclude:

    “It seems necessary to give an International Classification of Diseases to EHS to get it accepted as EMF-related health problems. The increasing exposure to RF-EMF in schools is of great concern and needs better attention. Longer-term health effects are unknown. Parents, teachers, and school boards have the responsibility to protect children from unnecessary exposure.” (4)

    Finally, for now at least, this is what telecoms company Swisscom said in a patent application to reduce the “electrosmog (its word) from Wi-Fi. This technology has never been implemented.

    “The risk of damage to health through electrosmog has also become better understood as a result of more recent and improved studies.

    When, for example, human blood cells are irradiated with electromagnetic fields, clear damage to hereditary material has been demonstrated and there have been indications of an increased cancer risk (Mashevich et al., 2003) … an aneuploidy (=numerical chromosome aberration) – was observed as a function of the SAR, demonstrating that this radiation has a genotoxic effect … These findings indicate that the genotoxic effect of electromagnetic radiation is elicited via a non-thermal pathway. Moreover aneuploidy is to be considered as a known phenomenon in the increase of cancer risk.”

    The application goes on to say:

    “Thus it has been possible to show that mobile radio radiation can cause damage to genetic material, in particular in human white blood cells, whereby both the DNA itself is damaged and the number of chromosomes changed. This mutation can consequently lead to increased cancer risk. In particular, it could also be shown that this destruction is not dependent upon temperature increases, i.e. is non-thermal.” (5)


  2. Thea on September 30th, 2015 1:00 pm

    I recommend you take some time to educate yourself on wireless radiation and the “best available science” that shows wireless damages, sperm, the ovaries and even damages the brains of rats and mice.

    The Yale Chief of OBGYN recommending reduced exposures.

    Over 200 scientists calling for action to the UN

    Read the research and do a follow up on the kids in school getting constant radiation please.

    Read about colleges and radiation here.

  3. Diane on September 30th, 2015 8:50 pm

    More than 20 Los Angeles Unified School District teachers have been granted a reasonable accommodation–without wireless radiation in their classroom. They have been diagnosed as electrosensitive from their exposure to RF-radiation at work.
    Ignorance does not excuse the bias or complete insensitivity of this article.

    LAUSD students bleeding from ear and nose, reports teacher.

  4. Veronica on September 30th, 2015 11:32 pm

    Science exists for decades that this is harmful to living things. It has been known for years that exposure affects our cells. What hasn’t been done is large scale research into why this happens or how specifically it happens because most of the research has been industry funded and even that shows about25% of the time there is a negative effect on organisms. The independent research shows this about 75% of the time! Quite a difference, eh?

    People are getting ill from this and they are developing extreme sensitivity. Thousands of previously healthy people are having their lives turned upside down because of the increasing exposure to pulse modulated radio waves. It has been shown to have a more disturbing effect on cells and cellular communication.

    Seems strange that thousands of people–hundreds of thousands of people–are developing the same constellation of symptoms upon exposure to the same environmental toxin. They are experiencing the dame symptoms that have been documented for decades of occupational exposure. Now that the general environment exceeds former occupational exposure–it makes perfect sense that people in the community would begin to show these same symptoms.

    Documenting or implying that something cannot exist because few if any studies have been done on it is just stupid. A medical issue can exist independent of whether they have investigated it and/or whether research has elucidated the exact mechanism of action. Many illnesses mechanism’s of action remain unknown. That certainly does not negate the fact that the conditions DO exist.

    Many studies exist showing biological effects from this exposure. Thousands in fact exist and this evidence is being added to regularly. It is a shame when a comment after an article provided more factual information than does the article. Mr. Dave Ashtons’s reply is full of useful and accurate information. Thank you Dave for providing some real factual information on this topic.

    Hundreds of thousands of people are suffering from this. Many lose their jobs, home, and income. Many were very successful an living a regular life when it got disrupted by this condition and this exposure. Most are struggling with both the medical/physical issues and the stigma that ignorance of this condition causes. Such a crippling condition and no real treatment and no real acceptance for it leads those affected down a very tragic path.

    Thankfully there are some doctors who are learned enough to see this for what it is and to begin to find treatment for this condition in spite of the denial that it exists by main stream medicine. Thankfully someone is listening BUT there is little in the way of treatment available or being offered. It is hit and miss. What works for one doesn’t work for all. Unfortunately there isn’t even much that works for some!

    By spending valuable resources denying the existence of this terrible condition and resources stigmatizing those affected–nothing is being done to help the victims. Victims of wireless radiation and victims of an industry and government who hide behind the research of old when new research clearly shows biological effects that are ATHERMAL in nature. That is–not related to heating effects. Those setting standards are refusing to look at this peer-reviewed and published research. Why they want to ignore this or how they can choose to ignore this is anybody’s guess. Mine is that money talks.

    Please get facts from all sides and learn to see who benefits from continued exposure to this class 2b carcinogen. Look at the facts of increases in cancer. Look at the number who are developing this and the total saturation of our world in this. It will keep happening until the number of people will make it impossible to deny any longer. Until then, those affected suffer in many ways.

  5. Derek Ward on October 1st, 2015 1:00 am

    There might have been 206 people some of whom are scientists, sign that appeal, but there are thousands and thousands of scientists who think it is utter nonsense. Yes there are studies that show biological effects from EMF exposure but the are many many more that show no effects and none that show actual harm.

  6. Fiona Hook on October 2nd, 2015 12:33 am

    Do cite a few, and tell us who sponsored them.

  7. Rich on April 5th, 2016 12:33 pm

    Yes, it’s always interesting to check who is paying for the science with what results they find. If you’ve got the money (and lordy knows the wireless industry has the money) you can pretty much make up the science and hide the truth for years… like tobacco, asbestos, agent orange… I could go on.

    How many scientists do you actually know who say “there is no effect”?
    Now, how many times have you read badly researched articles saying that “most scientists say there is no effect”?

    Now go and actually do some proper research…

  8. Julian on October 1st, 2015 6:58 am

    Nice piece of “Everything’s ok, keep calm and carry on!”

    When you say ‘few if any studies have been conducted that support the idea that wifi can lead to illness’, I assume you are talking about your own awareness of the subject, because actually there have been thousands of studies that show that wireless can cause harm of one form or another.

    There’s plenty to choose from, whether problems with DNA recombination, fertility issues, or being the cause of oxidative stress which in itself can lead to all sorts of problems, not least of which cancer and early onset alzheimers.

    Here’s one of those ‘few if any studies’ for you to read up on. Maybe it might change your mind.

    I mean if we can’t trust VW when they say their cars are safe, how sure are you some other corporate timebomb is not waiting to go off? Don’t wait to be told by the industry – in the case of cigarettes this took over 50 years – do some research and find out for yourselves.

By commenting, you give The Inquirer permission to quote, reprint or edit your words. Comments should be brief, have a positive or constructive tone, and stay on topic. If the commenter wants to bring something to The Inquirer’s attention, it should be relevant to the DVC community. Posts can politely disagree with The Inquirer or other commenters. Comments should not use abusive, threatening, offensive or vulgar language. They should not be personal attacks or celebrations of other people’s tragedies. They should not overtly or covertly contain commercial advertising. And they should not disrupt the forum. Editors may warn commenters or delete comments that violate this policy. Repeated violations may lead to a commenter being blocked. Public comments should not be anonymous or come from obviously fictitious accounts. To privately or anonymously bring something to the editors’ attention, contact them.

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.


Navigate Left
Navigate Right
The student news site of Diablo Valley College.
Wi-Fi sensitivity could result in disability pay