merrill@raja.DEC (Rick - Font Mgr. for Hardcopy Engineering) (07/11/85)
fact: VDT's emit less radiation than TV's. fact: no scientific group has issued warnings about VDT's fact: several studies have found isolated instances of problems experienced by women, pregnant and not, while using video display terminals (VDTs) that exceed statistical expectations. With a few exceptions these problems are due to POOR POSTURE, FATIGUE, EYESTRAIN (which causes other stress symptoms throught the body), and WORRY. In other words using a VDT is no more harmfull than spending day after expectant day staring out the window from a chair and worrying about whether staring out the window could hurt the unborn child. One INTERESTING exception occured in Sweden when 70% of the workers using data displays broke out in a rash/allergy around their faces! The mystery was finally solved when it was determined that the video display was putting a STATIC ELECTRIC charge on their bodies (just like a TV set can do) AND there were areosol paint particles in the air that were attracted to their faces by the electric charge! Rick Merrill
ksbszabo@wateng.UUCP (Kevin Szabo) (07/16/85)
In article <3064@decwrl.UUCP> merrill@raja.DEC (Rick - Font Mgr. for Hardcopy Engineering) writes: >fact: VDT's emit less radiation than TV's. >fact: no scientific group has issued warnings about VDT's >fact: several studies have found isolated instances of problems > experienced by women, pregnant and not, while using > video display terminals (VDTs) that exceed statistical > expectations. [ from memory, this may have little to do with the facts ] I don't have my references handy (standard disclaimer) but a study was done very recently at U of Waterloo. One of the things tested was the effect of the very low frequency radiation on the unborn fetus. The simulation used chicken eggs which were incubated in front of a CRT which was running (sorry, I don't know if there was a control group, I expect there was). There was a marked increase in abnormal chicks and non-births. In general our socienty treats electromagnetic radiation very carelessly. The effects of low frequency radiation have been discounted since the radiation is non-ionizing and hence `harmless'. Microwave radiation is also underestimated but has recently been shown to cause miscarriages in mice (at currently allowed doses). I personally feel that our disregard for the effects of EMR is similar to widespread use of lead in Roman times. It may eventually poison us and we'll never even know why. If anybody asks (via mail please) I will spend some time and dig up these articles. Kevin -- Kevin Szabo' watmath!wateng!ksbszabo (U of W VLSI Group, Waterloo, Ont, Canada)