They are selling an essentially worthless product to unknowing people[0] who believe their claim that ‘electromagnetic field radiation’ is a ‘threat’.
Now you might certainly argue that there are certain dangers associated with electromagnetic devices and that we don’t know enough to fully declare laptops ‘safe’. You would certainly be quite right about that - x-rays are dangerous and we can never be absolutely sure.
However, electromagnetic emissions from a laptop are
a) closely regulated in all (relevant) parts of the world with strong limits on the power a wifi device, for example, may emit and those limits are generally found to be more than safe even during extensive use by the vast majority of the scientific community
b) far surpassed by other items such as CRT monitors or washing machines
c) even further surpassed by this big device in the sky providing us all with infrared, visible and ultraviolet electromagnetic radiation
d) in many cases not even absorbed by the human body – otherwise the wifi signal would drop noticeably if someone stepped between you and the access point.
Furthermore, let’s look at least at one of the claims on the project site:
Very recently, new research is suggesting that […] malignant melanoma and asthma
[,] can be tied to some facet of our use of electricity
The rise in malignant melanoma are usually tied to sunburns[1], genetic disposition, increased livespans and better diagnostics. Unless this guy claims that use of electricity allowed us to go outside more or changed beauty ideals from ‘pale white’ to ‘remotely healthy’, I don’t see how electricity could have caused that. The idea that asthma can be linked to ‘use of electricity’ is…well.
And last but not least, this product, by design, blocks radiation emitted from the laptop’s bottom – hence ignoring everything emitted from the top and – more importantly – the screen. So even if electromagnetic fields as emitted by laptops were a threat, it would only protect your testicles, rather than, say, internal organs, bone marrow, your brain or your eyes. Note that while electromagnetic fields decay with 1/r² at distance, this decay is nearly negligible at such distances and air doesn’t absorb it in any noticeable ways, so that your brain likely gets as much as your lap anyways – especially since the screen of a notebook is even built to emit such radiation!
Really, this is just another one of these items sold to people complaining about headaches from mobile phone antennae before they’re switched on.
Note that I’m not saying heat emitted by some laptops is not a problem, but trousers help with that easily – and decent laptops, naturally.
[0] e.g. the grandparent getting some for their children after graduation
[1] One could argue that tanning salons run on electricity and induce sunburns if overused…
Thanks, you make some good points. My layman's understanding of the inverse square law makes me think that your claim that "your brain likely gets as much as your lap anyways" might be a bridge too far, but from your other comments, I'd like to see a chart of the emissions from other household objects before deciding how important that is.
Inverse squares kick in at large distances, 60cm or so is not a large distance. More importantly, anything diminishes electromagnetic radiation better than distance[0], and there is simply more matter between the bottom of the laptop and your lap and the top of the laptop and your brain.
Really, however, my main point is that the few milliwatts allowed for consumer electronics are well within the safe range – I have to admit, though, of being too lazy to search out the data, sorry.
[0] Just think about how easy it is to block light coming from the sun with a piece of paper.
It is definitely a cool case and better than many in the market. That said, thier USP is based on the fact that >3mG radiation has all of those harmful effects. I would feel more convinced if they chose to point us the studies or papers they keep talking about.
A quick websearch of his website turns up a number of vile hateful nonsense.
This is the problem with woo. I don't care if you want to buy a laptop case, even if you have a weird reason for buying it. That doesn't harm anyone. But the fact that you're giving money, and power, to destructive idiots is very bad.
8 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 26.6 ms ] threadThe bad thing about crowd funding is that everything necessary to get a project funded is to convince a subset of the general public.
This appears to be the Web 2.0 social startup indie version of Nigerian royalty.
Now you might certainly argue that there are certain dangers associated with electromagnetic devices and that we don’t know enough to fully declare laptops ‘safe’. You would certainly be quite right about that - x-rays are dangerous and we can never be absolutely sure.
However, electromagnetic emissions from a laptop are
a) closely regulated in all (relevant) parts of the world with strong limits on the power a wifi device, for example, may emit and those limits are generally found to be more than safe even during extensive use by the vast majority of the scientific community
b) far surpassed by other items such as CRT monitors or washing machines
c) even further surpassed by this big device in the sky providing us all with infrared, visible and ultraviolet electromagnetic radiation
d) in many cases not even absorbed by the human body – otherwise the wifi signal would drop noticeably if someone stepped between you and the access point.
Furthermore, let’s look at least at one of the claims on the project site:
The rise in malignant melanoma are usually tied to sunburns[1], genetic disposition, increased livespans and better diagnostics. Unless this guy claims that use of electricity allowed us to go outside more or changed beauty ideals from ‘pale white’ to ‘remotely healthy’, I don’t see how electricity could have caused that. The idea that asthma can be linked to ‘use of electricity’ is…well.And last but not least, this product, by design, blocks radiation emitted from the laptop’s bottom – hence ignoring everything emitted from the top and – more importantly – the screen. So even if electromagnetic fields as emitted by laptops were a threat, it would only protect your testicles, rather than, say, internal organs, bone marrow, your brain or your eyes. Note that while electromagnetic fields decay with 1/r² at distance, this decay is nearly negligible at such distances and air doesn’t absorb it in any noticeable ways, so that your brain likely gets as much as your lap anyways – especially since the screen of a notebook is even built to emit such radiation!
Really, this is just another one of these items sold to people complaining about headaches from mobile phone antennae before they’re switched on.
Note that I’m not saying heat emitted by some laptops is not a problem, but trousers help with that easily – and decent laptops, naturally.
[0] e.g. the grandparent getting some for their children after graduation
[1] One could argue that tanning salons run on electricity and induce sunburns if overused…
Really, however, my main point is that the few milliwatts allowed for consumer electronics are well within the safe range – I have to admit, though, of being too lazy to search out the data, sorry.
[0] Just think about how easy it is to block light coming from the sun with a piece of paper.
(http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html)
I'm not sure I believe anything an AIDS denialist has to say.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola#HIV_and_AIDS)
A quick websearch of his website turns up a number of vile hateful nonsense.
This is the problem with woo. I don't care if you want to buy a laptop case, even if you have a weird reason for buying it. That doesn't harm anyone. But the fact that you're giving money, and power, to destructive idiots is very bad.
(http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/9-reasons-to-c...)