My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
64 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

Svetaswan-2

Hi guys,

Long time no see.  I just thought I'd post an email (with a few omissions/modifications) that I just got finished sending someone in the group.  I'm sorry that it's so long-winded - but maybe, just maybe, there is a morsel or two in my autistic narrative that might be helpful to someone.  As I say in the email, I really regret not telling you guys about a laptop computer that I had known about for months that seemed relatively benign (at least to me).  What a big "D'OH" on my part.  I guess my "reasoning", if you can call it that - for not mentioning it is that I had sort-of dismissed it in my mind as an "el cheapo" brand computer that wasn't a viable long-term option.  But so far, this laptop is working for me - well, as much as a computer can "work" for someone with esens.  It might work for other eSens sufferers.  The email follows:

I just wanted to update you on my computer situation.  In February/March, I finally started making some moves on buying a new computer.  At first I bought an ASUS A52F-XA1 (15.6") laptop, but I returned it to amazon.com without even opening the box because when I later went to "test" the computer at Best Buy, it seemed like it would be pretty bothersome (I felt "forced" to make a quick purchase on amazon.com because it was showing one of those "Only 2 Left in Stock" type of messages).  Then, a  few weeks later, I took the plunge again; I was intrigued with ULV processors - so I bought an ASUS UL50-XA1 - this computer:

http://www.amazon.com/UL50AT-X1-Processor-Notebook-Windows-Premium/dp/B003DZCPL6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1306059154&sr=1-1

Well, it was pretty bad!  I started feeling quite "fried" about as soon as I turned on the computer.  In many ways, it was considerably worse than the laptop that I was trying to get away from.  The low-power, "battery" settings made it somewhat better - but not "better" enough.  Within hours, I pretty much knew that it wasn't something I should keep - there just had to be something better.  The ultra-low-voltage 1.3 GHz SU7300 Core 2 Duo processor just didn't "do the trick" as far as making that thing a tolerable machine.  Oh, I still have faith that ULV processors can contribute greatly to a relatively pain-free computing experience - but in that particular computer, it wasn't nearly enough to make it eSens-friendly (at least based on my experience).  I guess this just reinforces the "theory" (or fact) that there must be a lot more involved in computer emissions than just the processor/graphics card.

(I was focusing on ASUS computers because I had read that they have one of the best track records as far as durability/reliability - Dell's poor reputation for longevity steered me away from Dells.  I need for my investment to last a long time.)

So after this experience, I just said "f - it".  I was tired of the "buying-and-returning" merry-go-round.  I was tired of the "research" and the self-conscious store expeditions.  Luckily for me, I knew of a computer that was relatively benign on my eSens  -- the eMachines e725-4520.  For several months, I eschewed buying an eMachines in favor of searching for my notion of a "better option".  (The eMachines brand just didn't have a positive image in my mind for quality/durability – and I thought that I might find an even more eSens-friendly computer.   Besides, I wasn't sure whether I wanted a desktop or a laptop.)  Sometime early last year, without doing any "research" - my brother bought this computer at Walmart.  (My brother does not have electrosensitivity.) His decision-making "process" was basically, "My laptop died - I need a new computer fast - oh, this eMachines is very inexpensive."   During a couple of occasions last year, I spent hours "trying out" his computer - and it seemed relatively gentle on my esens.  I even felt comfortable with using his computer on my lap – and it had been a long time since I could do that with the Dell.  I was worried about the quality/durability - but when I checked the reviews of the laptop, it seemed to get as good (or better) reviews than a lot of the more "reputed brands" out there.  And my brother's laptop was still going strong after a year, it seemed.  So I searched around and bought one.  Here it is:

http://www.amazon.com/Acer-Emachines-E725-4520-250GBDVD%C2%B1RW-Wireless/dp/B003AG7N4C/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1270241710&sr=8-1

I'm not saying things are "perfect" with this computer (there is rarely a such thing as "perfect").  But my symptoms are a LOT less "active" with this eMachines than they were with the ASUS ULV monstrosity, and this computer just seems considerably more "gentle" than a lot of laptops out there.  There are a lot of times when I hardly notice any symptoms at all.  Funny - this "journey" I went on to find a good eSens computer - all of the so-called "research" I did - leads me back to my brother's eMachines, a "Walmart" computer that I had known about for many months.  I wish I had "the good sense" to buy this computer last year - when I could have bought it more easily and for at least $100 cheaper.

I also really regret that I didn't tell the eSens group about this computer as soon as I determined that it was a "tolerable" computer (at least for me) - especially in light of the lack of recommended brands/models of computers on eSens.  It might have provided some helpful "lead" to someone.  Now - since this computer is "last year's model",  it is harder to find - and people may more likely have to go through less "mainstream" vendors .

I'm just knocking on wood that this computer lasts.

I'm not sure if there is a current-model eMachines being sold - I think there may be.  Hopefully - whatever eMachines did (or didn't do) to make this computer relatively-benign - they have replicated in subsequent models.  I'd like to know what it is that makes this computer better than a lot of the others - is it something about the screen-technology, or what?  It could be that some of the same factors that make this computer less expensive than others (last year, it was selling for two-hundred-something dollars at Walmart), makes it more tolerable.  This experience leads me to conclude that it may be fruitful for eSens folks to search for cheap, "low-end" computers being sold at Walmart or Target or somewhere.

Also – it is worth mentioning that Acer bought eMachines a few years back - so this computer was actually manufactured by Acer, I think.  So maybe there are some Acer models that share certain characteristics with this eMachines.  An "extreme" example of this is the possibility that this particular Acer computer is the *exact same* computer as my eMachines - it just has an "Acer" label instead of an "eMachines" label:

http://www.amazon.com/Acer-AS5732Z-4867-15-6-Inch-Display-Laptop/dp/B00358XT5W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1270242214&sr=8-1

I've also realized more than ever that software issues - at least for me - play an important role in computer tolerability.  If the "wrong" software, spyware, or "bloatware" gets installed on this computer - it can become bothersome.  For ex., when I installed the version of Malwarebytes that has real-time protection, I thought I noticed this computer immediately becoming bothersome - thankfully, I could disable the real-time protection.  I also notice that using Mozilla Firefox is significantly less bothersome than using Internet Explorer:  I guess it's a less "bloated", resource-hogging browser.  One reason seems to be that Mozilla gives you the option of deleting individual cookies (I swear I sometimes notice an immediate difference when I delete cookies).  I was nervous about the latest version of Firefox having "hardware acceleration" (the latest IE has this as well) - it just sounds like something that would increase emf.  So I avoided upgrading - until circumstances sort-of "forced" me to upgrade.  Fortunately, there is an option in the new Firefox where you can turn hardware-acceleration off.

Looking back, I wonder if the worsening/progression of my electrosensitivity - when my symptoms really started "screaming" - was due to an accumulation of cookies/malware/crapware dumped on my computer harddrive.  I really do believe this played a definite role.  Maybe there was some "poorly scripted" crapware that put a particular strain on my resources/harddrive.  More and more unwanted "stuff" kept getting dumped on my harddrive.  I admit that I was lazy/naiive about installing an anti-virus/anti-spyware program - not that it would have made *too* much of a difference in the long run .  I'm very skeptical about these anti-malware programs truly keeping rogue junk from eventually accumulating on people's computers.

Another thing I did with this eMachines (I also did it on the Dell) that made a positive difference is change the monitor display settings from the default 32-bit color to 16-bit color...it seems to either decrease emf, and/or lead to eye-strain relief.  There may be things I can do to further "tweak" the graphics to decrease computer stress, but I currently don't feel any urgent need to do them.

Of course, the computer offers a variety of power-management settings - I think most late-model, Windows 7 laptops do.  One thing that's good is that you can configure the computer to run on low, "battery"-type power settings - even when the computer is plugged in.  But so far, I choose not to do this.  I'm running the computer on the default "balanced" settings when it is plugged in.

I just think it helps to keep the harddrive as "clean" and as "empty" as possible.  In addition to trying to keep cookies/spyware/adware etc. off the harddrive, I think I'm going to try to minimize the amount of files I put on it.

Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router.  I remember you telling me that I could do this, but I was too lethargic/green-thumbed to pursue the matter.  In the back of my mind, I thought there would be a lot involved...that it wasn't for the novice.  But one day in desperation (after a confrontation with my father in which he ordered me to stop turning off the WiFi router, since it also turns off our landline phone service) - I stumbled upon the way to do this.  I logged into our router settings.  The power output is adjustable from Level 1 to Level 10 - of course, our WiFi was operating at the maximum level of 10 (which is the default).  Each time I adjusted the power downward, I noticed relief - i.e., from 10 to 5, from 5 to 3, etc..  Eventually, I decided to keep it at 1 - our computers seem to be dealing with the weaker signal fine.  I also noticed a positive difference when I changed the setting to stop the router from cranking out both "b" and "g" signals.  Now it only outputs "g" signals.

Sorry for the loong novella.  I just thought I'd update you on the status of things - just in case you thought I had died or something, lol.  No, the radiation hasn't claimed me quite yet.  Thanks to an improved computer and WiFi situation, things are better than they were a year ago.  Oh, make no mistake - I'm still very much eSens.  I still fear that I've suffered considerable mental and physical damage.  I fear that this computer may become more and more bothersome as the "surreptitious files" start to accumulate.  I can still "feel" the WiFi in the air sometimes - though not nearly as much as I could.  Even with the WiFi power at one, laying on my innerspring mattress bed was still very bothersome.  I recently replaced my "wire-antenna" bed with a "wireless" latex one - although this situation is still in flux because I may have to return the latex bed (the offgassing/fumes have been a big problem for me).

~Svetaswan




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

wi-fi

emraware
> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router.  I remember you telling me that I could do this

Svetaswan,  

I don't remember ever suggesting this.  I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.

Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation.  Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you...  Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?

One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head.  I think some laptops might be similar?  IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings.  That's the best.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

Svetaswan-2


Emraware,

You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you.  I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of?  It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.

And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted.  So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it.  If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago.  As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.

I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable".  It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).

It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings.  They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did.  Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.

Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router).  I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.

There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter:  "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving".  Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery.  I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".  

There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter.  But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.

In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently.  Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...

~Svetaswan

--- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:

>
> > Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router.  I remember you telling me that I could do this
>
> Svetaswan,  
>
> I don't remember ever suggesting this.  I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>
> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation.  Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you...  Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>
> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head.  I think some laptops might be similar?  IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings.  That's the best.
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

Svetaswan-2


Just wanted to clarify the 6th paragraph below a little.  When I say I can "command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power" - I'm talking about the wireless adapter within the computer, not the router.  (I'm clarifying for the novices who may come across this message at some point - not for the experts like Emraware.)  In Windows 7, you can do this by going into "Control Panel", then choosing "System and Security", then choosing "Power Options".  You can choose a "Power Plan", and can further tweak power options if you click on "Change Plan Settings".  Then you can click on "Change Advanced Power Settings" - then you can click on the specific device that you want to change.  Among other things, you can make changes under the "Wireless Adapter Settings", the "Processor Power Management", or the "Multimedia Settings".  

In my experience, making changes to these settings can really make a difference in how the computer "feels" - it's apparent emf.  For example, I just changed the Wireless Adapter Settings from "Low Power Saving" to "Medium Power Saving" and felt an immediate difference.

~Svetaswan

--- In [hidden email], "svetaswan" <svetaswan@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you.  I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of?  It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted.  So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it.  If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago.  As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable".  It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings.  They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did.  Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router).  I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter:  "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving".  Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery.  I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".  
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter.  But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently.  Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@> wrote:
> >
> > > Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router.  I remember you telling me that I could do this
> >
> > Svetaswan,  
> >
> > I don't remember ever suggesting this.  I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
> >
> > Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation.  Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you...  Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
> >
> > One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head.  I think some laptops might be similar?  IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings.  That's the best.
> >
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

Andrew McAfee
In reply to this post by Svetaswan-2
So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew





On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you.  I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of?  It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted.  So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it.  If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago.  As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable".  It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings.  They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did.  Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router).  I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter:  "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving".  Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery.  I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".  
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter.  But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently.  Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router.  I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,  
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this.  I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation.  Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you...  Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head.  I think some laptops might be similar?  IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings.  That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

adiaha22
Wow,
 
This reality of ours really hits on the theme of power vs. powerlessness.  I, too feel powerless at times... at home, because of all the extraneous electronic noise that comes in from the busy street that I live on and the residents and visitors with cell phones and bad attitudes within the house which seem to be multiplied by the microwaves.  But also at work (a hospital) where laptops are in multiple usage and WIFI is available to all and cell phones rule the roost. 
 
I feel a bit better now since getting some of the fabric manufactured by LessEMF at 50db atttenuation. Where I used to confront people all the time as they would near me with cell phones (new age weaponry to my body) and push their friggin'laptops right up to my work area.
 
The loose piece of fabric only helps to make me more tolerant, but doesn't completely protect me.  I need to have a wardrobe made.  Metallic threads are very expensive to make into garments.  One must crawl before walking.
 
Parents do exert a considerable amount of influence as do one's boss and one's spouse, even one's children have influence.  Andrew is right when he says we must be empowered.  Maybe that's why some of us came down with this thing.  We are the vanguard.  Sadly, we are the ones who are forced to listen to and embrace the microwave warnings because everyone else thinks that any harm may be a decade away, if at all...and we know right now that harm is being done.
 
Parents are at potential risk as well, especially from cell phones.  There is just no way to ride two horses with one butt. I truly believe that we will become empowered and I am so happy to see those of us making strides to change this dismal future.  But if we don't who will? 
 
Global society is deaf, dumb and blind (consciously) to what may very well rivot our human genome over the next 50 years.  Cigarettes ain't seen nothing. FiGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, or maybe perish!  These are fighting words in a time where war has been silently waged against us.

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 8:37 AM


 



So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did. Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

Elizabeth thode

Amen sister! I applaud your fire!
The other day I stood in front of a cash register that had a DECT phone (cordless) and base right in front of me. The poor cashier
had her brains frozen over the transaction of deducting 20 % off the bill.....she was so embarrassed. I ended up helping her
do the math. The boss was standing right next to her, and he couldn't do the math either, or operate the register to deduct
the 20 % off. A day later, I had the worse radiation hang over I've ever had to date. These people do not have a clue that
those dect phone bases are literally like standing within the shadows of a very powerful cell antenna!
Lizzie
 


To: [hidden email]
From: [hidden email]
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 09:33:37 -0700
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi


 



Wow,
 
This reality of ours really hits on the theme of power vs. powerlessness.  I, too feel powerless at times... at home, because of all the extraneous electronic noise that comes in from the busy street that I live on and the residents and visitors with cell phones and bad attitudes within the house which seem to be multiplied by the microwaves.  But also at work (a hospital) where laptops are in multiple usage and WIFI is available to all and cell phones rule the roost.  
 
I feel a bit better now since getting some of the fabric manufactured by LessEMF at 50db atttenuation. Where I used to confront people all the time as they would near me with cell phones (new age weaponry to my body) and push their friggin'laptops right up to my work area.
 
The loose piece of fabric only helps to make me more tolerant, but doesn't completely protect me.  I need to have a wardrobe made.  Metallic threads are very expensive to make into garments.  One must crawl before walking.
 
Parents do exert a considerable amount of influence as do one's boss and one's spouse, even one's children have influence.  Andrew is right when he says we must be empowered.  Maybe that's why some of us came down with this thing.  We are the vanguard.  Sadly, we are the ones who are forced to listen to and embrace the microwave warnings because everyone else thinks that any harm may be a decade away, if at all...and we know right now that harm is being done.
 
Parents are at potential risk as well, especially from cell phones.  There is just no way to ride two horses with one butt. I truly believe that we will become empowered and I am so happy to see those of us making strides to change this dismal future.  But if we don't who will?  
 
Global society is deaf, dumb and blind (consciously) to what may very well rivot our human genome over the next 50 years.  Cigarettes ain't seen nothing. FiGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, or maybe perish!  These are fighting words in a time where war has been silently waged against us.

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 8:37 AM

 

So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did. Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

BiBrun
In reply to this post by Svetaswan-2
Great info! thanks!

On windows machines you might want to try
the google chrome browser instead of firefox.

Seems to use less resources?

For latex the dulop process is nasty, but the
other one, talalay, is not bad (but costs more).

How far from the eMachines can you pick up
radio static or buzz?  I think some run linux,
but yours is Windows right?  Which Windows?

Bill



On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:05 AM, svetaswan <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Long time no see. I just thought I'd post an email (with a few
> omissions/modifications) that I just got finished sending someone in the
> group. I'm sorry that it's so long-winded - but maybe, just maybe, there is
> a morsel or two in my autistic narrative that might be helpful to someone.
> As I say in the email, I really regret not telling you guys about a laptop
> computer that I had known about for months that seemed relatively benign (at
> least to me). What a big "D'OH" on my part. I guess my "reasoning", if you
> can call it that - for not mentioning it is that I had sort-of dismissed it
> in my mind as an "el cheapo" brand computer that wasn't a viable long-term
> option. But so far, this laptop is working for me - well, as much as a
> computer can "work" for someone with esens. It might work for other eSens
> sufferers. The email follows:
>
> I just wanted to update you on my computer situation. In February/March, I
> finally started making some moves on buying a new computer. At first I
> bought an ASUS A52F-XA1 (15.6") laptop, but I returned it to amazon.comwithout even opening the box because when I later went to "test" the
> computer at Best Buy, it seemed like it would be pretty bothersome (I felt
> "forced" to make a quick purchase on amazon.com because it was showing one
> of those "Only 2 Left in Stock" type of messages). Then, a few weeks later,
> I took the plunge again; I was intrigued with ULV processors - so I bought
> an ASUS UL50-XA1 - this computer:
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/UL50AT-X1-Processor-Notebook-Windows-Premium/dp/B003DZCPL6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1306059154&sr=1-1
>
> Well, it was pretty bad! I started feeling quite "fried" about as soon as I
> turned on the computer. In many ways, it was considerably worse than the
> laptop that I was trying to get away from. The low-power, "battery" settings
> made it somewhat better - but not "better" enough. Within hours, I pretty
> much knew that it wasn't something I should keep - there just had to be
> something better. The ultra-low-voltage 1.3 GHz SU7300 Core 2 Duo processor
> just didn't "do the trick" as far as making that thing a tolerable machine.
> Oh, I still have faith that ULV processors can contribute greatly to a
> relatively pain-free computing experience - but in that particular computer,
> it wasn't nearly enough to make it eSens-friendly (at least based on my
> experience). I guess this just reinforces the "theory" (or fact) that there
> must be a lot more involved in computer emissions than just the
> processor/graphics card.
>
> (I was focusing on ASUS computers because I had read that they have one of
> the best track records as far as durability/reliability - Dell's poor
> reputation for longevity steered me away from Dells. I need for my
> investment to last a long time.)
>
> So after this experience, I just said "f - it". I was tired of the
> "buying-and-returning" merry-go-round. I was tired of the "research" and the
> self-conscious store expeditions. Luckily for me, I knew of a computer that
> was relatively benign on my eSens -- the eMachines e725-4520. For several
> months, I eschewed buying an eMachines in favor of searching for my notion
> of a "better option". (The eMachines brand just didn't have a positive image
> in my mind for quality/durability – and I thought that I might find an even
> more eSens-friendly computer. Besides, I wasn't sure whether I wanted a
> desktop or a laptop.) Sometime early last year, without doing any "research"
> - my brother bought this computer at Walmart. (My brother does not have
> electrosensitivity.) His decision-making "process" was basically, "My laptop
> died - I need a new computer fast - oh, this eMachines is very inexpensive."
> During a couple of occasions last year, I spent hours "trying out" his
> computer - and it seemed relatively gentle on my esens. I even felt
> comfortable with using his computer on my lap – and it had been a long time
> since I could do that with the Dell. I was worried about the
> quality/durability - but when I checked the reviews of the laptop, it seemed
> to get as good (or better) reviews than a lot of the more "reputed brands"
> out there. And my brother's laptop was still going strong after a year, it
> seemed. So I searched around and bought one. Here it is:
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Acer-Emachines-E725-4520-250GBDVD%C2%B1RW-Wireless/dp/B003AG7N4C/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1270241710&sr=8-1
>
> I'm not saying things are "perfect" with this computer (there is rarely a
> such thing as "perfect"). But my symptoms are a LOT less "active" with this
> eMachines than they were with the ASUS ULV monstrosity, and this computer
> just seems considerably more "gentle" than a lot of laptops out there. There
> are a lot of times when I hardly notice any symptoms at all. Funny - this
> "journey" I went on to find a good eSens computer - all of the so-called
> "research" I did - leads me back to my brother's eMachines, a "Walmart"
> computer that I had known about for many months. I wish I had "the good
> sense" to buy this computer last year - when I could have bought it more
> easily and for at least $100 cheaper.
>
> I also really regret that I didn't tell the eSens group about this computer
> as soon as I determined that it was a "tolerable" computer (at least for me)
> - especially in light of the lack of recommended brands/models of computers
> on eSens. It might have provided some helpful "lead" to someone. Now - since
> this computer is "last year's model", it is harder to find - and people may
> more likely have to go through less "mainstream" vendors .
>
> I'm just knocking on wood that this computer lasts.
>
> I'm not sure if there is a current-model eMachines being sold - I think
> there may be. Hopefully - whatever eMachines did (or didn't do) to make this
> computer relatively-benign - they have replicated in subsequent models. I'd
> like to know what it is that makes this computer better than a lot of the
> others - is it something about the screen-technology, or what? It could be
> that some of the same factors that make this computer less expensive than
> others (last year, it was selling for two-hundred-something dollars at
> Walmart), makes it more tolerable. This experience leads me to conclude that
> it may be fruitful for eSens folks to search for cheap, "low-end" computers
> being sold at Walmart or Target or somewhere.
>
> Also – it is worth mentioning that Acer bought eMachines a few years back -
> so this computer was actually manufactured by Acer, I think. So maybe there
> are some Acer models that share certain characteristics with this eMachines.
> An "extreme" example of this is the possibility that this particular Acer
> computer is the *exact same* computer as my eMachines - it just has an
> "Acer" label instead of an "eMachines" label:
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Acer-AS5732Z-4867-15-6-Inch-Display-Laptop/dp/B00358XT5W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1270242214&sr=8-1
>
> I've also realized more than ever that software issues - at least for me -
> play an important role in computer tolerability. If the "wrong" software,
> spyware, or "bloatware" gets installed on this computer - it can become
> bothersome. For ex., when I installed the version of Malwarebytes that has
> real-time protection, I thought I noticed this computer immediately becoming
> bothersome - thankfully, I could disable the real-time protection. I also
> notice that using Mozilla Firefox is significantly less bothersome than
> using Internet Explorer: I guess it's a less "bloated", resource-hogging
> browser. One reason seems to be that Mozilla gives you the option of
> deleting individual cookies (I swear I sometimes notice an immediate
> difference when I delete cookies). I was nervous about the latest version of
> Firefox having "hardware acceleration" (the latest IE has this as well) - it
> just sounds like something that would increase emf. So I avoided upgrading -
> until circumstances sort-of "forced" me to upgrade. Fortunately, there is an
> option in the new Firefox where you can turn hardware-acceleration off.
>
> Looking back, I wonder if the worsening/progression of my
> electrosensitivity - when my symptoms really started "screaming" - was due
> to an accumulation of cookies/malware/crapware dumped on my computer
> harddrive. I really do believe this played a definite role. Maybe there was
> some "poorly scripted" crapware that put a particular strain on my
> resources/harddrive. More and more unwanted "stuff" kept getting dumped on
> my harddrive. I admit that I was lazy/naiive about installing an
> anti-virus/anti-spyware program - not that it would have made *too* much of
> a difference in the long run . I'm very skeptical about these anti-malware
> programs truly keeping rogue junk from eventually accumulating on people's
> computers.
>
> Another thing I did with this eMachines (I also did it on the Dell) that
> made a positive difference is change the monitor display settings from the
> default 32-bit color to 16-bit color...it seems to either decrease emf,
> and/or lead to eye-strain relief. There may be things I can do to further
> "tweak" the graphics to decrease computer stress, but I currently don't feel
> any urgent need to do them.
>
> Of course, the computer offers a variety of power-management settings - I
> think most late-model, Windows 7 laptops do. One thing that's good is that
> you can configure the computer to run on low, "battery"-type power settings
> - even when the computer is plugged in. But so far, I choose not to do this.
> I'm running the computer on the default "balanced" settings when it is
> plugged in.
>
> I just think it helps to keep the harddrive as "clean" and as "empty" as
> possible. In addition to trying to keep cookies/spyware/adware etc. off the
> harddrive, I think I'm going to try to minimize the amount of files I put on
> it.
>
> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power
> output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I
> could do this, but I was too lethargic/green-thumbed to pursue the matter.
> In the back of my mind, I thought there would be a lot involved...that it
> wasn't for the novice. But one day in desperation (after a confrontation
> with my father in which he ordered me to stop turning off the WiFi router,
> since it also turns off our landline phone service) - I stumbled upon the
> way to do this. I logged into our router settings. The power output is
> adjustable from Level 1 to Level 10 - of course, our WiFi was operating at
> the maximum level of 10 (which is the default). Each time I adjusted the
> power downward, I noticed relief - i.e., from 10 to 5, from 5 to 3, etc..
> Eventually, I decided to keep it at 1 - our computers seem to be dealing
> with the weaker signal fine. I also noticed a positive difference when I
> changed the setting to stop the router from cranking out both "b" and "g"
> signals. Now it only outputs "g" signals.
>
> Sorry for the loong novella. I just thought I'd update you on the status of
> things - just in case you thought I had died or something, lol. No, the
> radiation hasn't claimed me quite yet. Thanks to an improved computer and
> WiFi situation, things are better than they were a year ago. Oh, make no
> mistake - I'm still very much eSens. I still fear that I've suffered
> considerable mental and physical damage. I fear that this computer may
> become more and more bothersome as the "surreptitious files" start to
> accumulate. I can still "feel" the WiFi in the air sometimes - though not
> nearly as much as I could. Even with the WiFi power at one, laying on my
> innerspring mattress bed was still very bothersome. I recently replaced my
> "wire-antenna" bed with a "wireless" latex one - although this situation is
> still in flux because I may have to return the latex bed (the
> offgassing/fumes have been a big problem for me).
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eSens/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eSens/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

evie15422
In reply to this post by adiaha22
Hi, Pamela,
 
Have you ever tried bathing in baking soda?  Wow, you are in a very acidic environment, daily.  Baking soda bathing will not do wonders, but it should help some.  Raising your pH in other ways might help also.  (Soak your hair in the baking soda, too, but
don't wash your hair with shampoo or your body with soap after soaking in bathing soda, btw; just shower off and rinse the soda off.) 
 
Raising your body frequency, chi, whatever you want to call it--and pH--are each empowering to a person, also.  Some people just exude power; do you know what I mean?  When they walk into a room, without doing anything consciously, they just own the space and you know they are a force to be reckoned with.  Another person can walk into a room and you know they are a push over.  As Westerners, we think of empowerment as being something we consciously work for or do.  In Eastern countries, they emphasize empowerment from within.  Both might be needed, but I see a difference in my life luck-wise (how easily things flow for me), and in how people treat me (who do not know me), AND ES-wise just from improving my pH and trying to bring more good chi and good frequencies into my life.
 
Hope this helps you,
Diane

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, pamela clemonts <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: pamela clemonts <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 12:33 PM


 



Wow,
 
This reality of ours really hits on the theme of power vs. powerlessness.  I, too feel powerless at times... at home, because of all the extraneous electronic noise that comes in from the busy street that I live on and the residents and visitors with cell phones and bad attitudes within the house which seem to be multiplied by the microwaves.  But also at work (a hospital) where laptops are in multiple usage and WIFI is available to all and cell phones rule the roost. 
 
I feel a bit better now since getting some of the fabric manufactured by LessEMF at 50db atttenuation. Where I used to confront people all the time as they would near me with cell phones (new age weaponry to my body) and push their friggin'laptops right up to my work area.
 
The loose piece of fabric only helps to make me more tolerant, but doesn't completely protect me.  I need to have a wardrobe made.  Metallic threads are very expensive to make into garments.  One must crawl before walking.
 
Parents do exert a considerable amount of influence as do one's boss and one's spouse, even one's children have influence.  Andrew is right when he says we must be empowered.  Maybe that's why some of us came down with this thing.  We are the vanguard.  Sadly, we are the ones who are forced to listen to and embrace the microwave warnings because everyone else thinks that any harm may be a decade away, if at all...and we know right now that harm is being done.
 
Parents are at potential risk as well, especially from cell phones.  There is just no way to ride two horses with one butt. I truly believe that we will become empowered and I am so happy to see those of us making strides to change this dismal future.  But if we don't who will? 
 
Global society is deaf, dumb and blind (consciously) to what may very well rivot our human genome over the next 50 years.  Cigarettes ain't seen nothing. FiGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, or maybe perish!  These are fighting words in a time where war has been silently waged against us.

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 8:37 AM

 

So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did. Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

steve
In reply to this post by Svetaswan-2
Bed wise I am thinking of getting an organic futon that has wool in it so no fire retardant is needed on top of a wooden bed
Steve

--- In [hidden email], "svetaswan" <svetaswan@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Long time no see.  I just thought I'd post an email (with a few omissions/modifications) that I just got finished sending someone in the group.  I'm sorry that it's so long-winded - but maybe, just maybe, there is a morsel or two in my autistic narrative that might be helpful to someone.  As I say in the email, I really regret not telling you guys about a laptop computer that I had known about for months that seemed relatively benign (at least to me).  What a big "D'OH" on my part.  I guess my "reasoning", if you can call it that - for not mentioning it is that I had sort-of dismissed it in my mind as an "el cheapo" brand computer that wasn't a viable long-term option.  But so far, this laptop is working for me - well, as much as a computer can "work" for someone with esens.  It might work for other eSens sufferers.  The email follows:
>
> I just wanted to update you on my computer situation.  In February/March, I finally started making some moves on buying a new computer.  At first I bought an ASUS A52F-XA1 (15.6") laptop, but I returned it to amazon.com without even opening the box because when I later went to "test" the computer at Best Buy, it seemed like it would be pretty bothersome (I felt "forced" to make a quick purchase on amazon.com because it was showing one of those "Only 2 Left in Stock" type of messages).  Then, a  few weeks later, I took the plunge again; I was intrigued with ULV processors - so I bought an ASUS UL50-XA1 - this computer:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/UL50AT-X1-Processor-Notebook-Windows-Premium/dp/B003DZCPL6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1306059154&sr=1-1
>
> Well, it was pretty bad!  I started feeling quite "fried" about as soon as I turned on the computer.  In many ways, it was considerably worse than the laptop that I was trying to get away from.  The low-power, "battery" settings made it somewhat better - but not "better" enough.  Within hours, I pretty much knew that it wasn't something I should keep - there just had to be something better.  The ultra-low-voltage 1.3 GHz SU7300 Core 2 Duo processor just didn't "do the trick" as far as making that thing a tolerable machine.  Oh, I still have faith that ULV processors can contribute greatly to a relatively pain-free computing experience - but in that particular computer, it wasn't nearly enough to make it eSens-friendly (at least based on my experience).  I guess this just reinforces the "theory" (or fact) that there must be a lot more involved in computer emissions than just the processor/graphics card.
>
> (I was focusing on ASUS computers because I had read that they have one of the best track records as far as durability/reliability - Dell's poor reputation for longevity steered me away from Dells.  I need for my investment to last a long time.)
>
> So after this experience, I just said "f - it".  I was tired of the "buying-and-returning" merry-go-round.  I was tired of the "research" and the self-conscious store expeditions.  Luckily for me, I knew of a computer that was relatively benign on my eSens  -- the eMachines e725-4520.  For several months, I eschewed buying an eMachines in favor of searching for my notion of a "better option".  (The eMachines brand just didn't have a positive image in my mind for quality/durability – and I thought that I might find an even more eSens-friendly computer.   Besides, I wasn't sure whether I wanted a desktop or a laptop.)  Sometime early last year, without doing any "research" - my brother bought this computer at Walmart.  (My brother does not have electrosensitivity.) His decision-making "process" was basically, "My laptop died - I need a new computer fast - oh, this eMachines is very inexpensive."   During a couple of occasions last year, I spent hours "trying out" his computer - and it seemed relatively gentle on my esens.  I even felt comfortable with using his computer on my lap – and it had been a long time since I could do that with the Dell.  I was worried about the quality/durability - but when I checked the reviews of the laptop, it seemed to get as good (or better) reviews than a lot of the more "reputed brands" out there.  And my brother's laptop was still going strong after a year, it seemed.  So I searched around and bought one.  Here it is:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Acer-Emachines-E725-4520-250GBDVD%C2%B1RW-Wireless/dp/B003AG7N4C/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1270241710&sr=8-1
>
> I'm not saying things are "perfect" with this computer (there is rarely a such thing as "perfect").  But my symptoms are a LOT less "active" with this eMachines than they were with the ASUS ULV monstrosity, and this computer just seems considerably more "gentle" than a lot of laptops out there.  There are a lot of times when I hardly notice any symptoms at all.  Funny - this "journey" I went on to find a good eSens computer - all of the so-called "research" I did - leads me back to my brother's eMachines, a "Walmart" computer that I had known about for many months.  I wish I had "the good sense" to buy this computer last year - when I could have bought it more easily and for at least $100 cheaper.
>
> I also really regret that I didn't tell the eSens group about this computer as soon as I determined that it was a "tolerable" computer (at least for me) - especially in light of the lack of recommended brands/models of computers on eSens.  It might have provided some helpful "lead" to someone.  Now - since this computer is "last year's model",  it is harder to find - and people may more likely have to go through less "mainstream" vendors .
>
> I'm just knocking on wood that this computer lasts.
>
> I'm not sure if there is a current-model eMachines being sold - I think there may be.  Hopefully - whatever eMachines did (or didn't do) to make this computer relatively-benign - they have replicated in subsequent models.  I'd like to know what it is that makes this computer better than a lot of the others - is it something about the screen-technology, or what?  It could be that some of the same factors that make this computer less expensive than others (last year, it was selling for two-hundred-something dollars at Walmart), makes it more tolerable.  This experience leads me to conclude that it may be fruitful for eSens folks to search for cheap, "low-end" computers being sold at Walmart or Target or somewhere.
>
> Also – it is worth mentioning that Acer bought eMachines a few years back - so this computer was actually manufactured by Acer, I think.  So maybe there are some Acer models that share certain characteristics with this eMachines.  An "extreme" example of this is the possibility that this particular Acer computer is the *exact same* computer as my eMachines - it just has an "Acer" label instead of an "eMachines" label:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Acer-AS5732Z-4867-15-6-Inch-Display-Laptop/dp/B00358XT5W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1270242214&sr=8-1
>
> I've also realized more than ever that software issues - at least for me - play an important role in computer tolerability.  If the "wrong" software, spyware, or "bloatware" gets installed on this computer - it can become bothersome.  For ex., when I installed the version of Malwarebytes that has real-time protection, I thought I noticed this computer immediately becoming bothersome - thankfully, I could disable the real-time protection.  I also notice that using Mozilla Firefox is significantly less bothersome than using Internet Explorer:  I guess it's a less "bloated", resource-hogging browser.  One reason seems to be that Mozilla gives you the option of deleting individual cookies (I swear I sometimes notice an immediate difference when I delete cookies).  I was nervous about the latest version of Firefox having "hardware acceleration" (the latest IE has this as well) - it just sounds like something that would increase emf.  So I avoided upgrading - until circumstances sort-of "forced" me to upgrade.  Fortunately, there is an option in the new Firefox where you can turn hardware-acceleration off.
>
> Looking back, I wonder if the worsening/progression of my electrosensitivity - when my symptoms really started "screaming" - was due to an accumulation of cookies/malware/crapware dumped on my computer harddrive.  I really do believe this played a definite role.  Maybe there was some "poorly scripted" crapware that put a particular strain on my resources/harddrive.  More and more unwanted "stuff" kept getting dumped on my harddrive.  I admit that I was lazy/naiive about installing an anti-virus/anti-spyware program - not that it would have made *too* much of a difference in the long run .  I'm very skeptical about these anti-malware programs truly keeping rogue junk from eventually accumulating on people's computers.
>
> Another thing I did with this eMachines (I also did it on the Dell) that made a positive difference is change the monitor display settings from the default 32-bit color to 16-bit color...it seems to either decrease emf, and/or lead to eye-strain relief.  There may be things I can do to further "tweak" the graphics to decrease computer stress, but I currently don't feel any urgent need to do them.
>
> Of course, the computer offers a variety of power-management settings - I think most late-model, Windows 7 laptops do.  One thing that's good is that you can configure the computer to run on low, "battery"-type power settings - even when the computer is plugged in.  But so far, I choose not to do this.  I'm running the computer on the default "balanced" settings when it is plugged in.
>
> I just think it helps to keep the harddrive as "clean" and as "empty" as possible.  In addition to trying to keep cookies/spyware/adware etc. off the harddrive, I think I'm going to try to minimize the amount of files I put on it.
>
> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router.  I remember you telling me that I could do this, but I was too lethargic/green-thumbed to pursue the matter.  In the back of my mind, I thought there would be a lot involved...that it wasn't for the novice.  But one day in desperation (after a confrontation with my father in which he ordered me to stop turning off the WiFi router, since it also turns off our landline phone service) - I stumbled upon the way to do this.  I logged into our router settings.  The power output is adjustable from Level 1 to Level 10 - of course, our WiFi was operating at the maximum level of 10 (which is the default).  Each time I adjusted the power downward, I noticed relief - i.e., from 10 to 5, from 5 to 3, etc..  Eventually, I decided to keep it at 1 - our computers seem to be dealing with the weaker signal fine.  I also noticed a positive difference when I changed the setting to stop the router from cranking out both "b" and "g" signals.  Now it only outputs "g" signals.
>
> Sorry for the loong novella.  I just thought I'd update you on the status of things - just in case you thought I had died or something, lol.  No, the radiation hasn't claimed me quite yet.  Thanks to an improved computer and WiFi situation, things are better than they were a year ago.  Oh, make no mistake - I'm still very much eSens.  I still fear that I've suffered considerable mental and physical damage.  I fear that this computer may become more and more bothersome as the "surreptitious files" start to accumulate.  I can still "feel" the WiFi in the air sometimes - though not nearly as much as I could.  Even with the WiFi power at one, laying on my innerspring mattress bed was still very bothersome.  I recently replaced my "wire-antenna" bed with a "wireless" latex one - although this situation is still in flux because I may have to return the latex bed (the offgassing/fumes have been a big problem for me).
>
> ~Svetaswan
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

Loni Rosser
In reply to this post by Andrew McAfee
Thanks Andrew I needed to hear that. I really need to make changes in my life as well. Powerful words that people need to hear!  Loni  

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 5:37 AM


 



So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did. Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

Andrew McAfee
Thank you Loni. I was worried how you were going to take it.
with love,
Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 5:25 PM, Loni wrote:

> Thanks Andrew I needed to hear that. I really need to make changes  
> in my life as well. Powerful words that people need to hear!  Loni
>
> --- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 5:37 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and  
> you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is  
> better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems  
> to turn it off?
>
> That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life  
> and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by  
> leaving or waking these people up to your reality.
>
> You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing  
> to do with you.
>
> Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas  
> from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They  
> have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to  
> where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download  
> speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more  
> secure.
>
> You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the  
> residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being  
> radiated 24/7.
>
> At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless  
> someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.
>
> Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.
>
> Andrew
>
> On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Emraware,
>>
>> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't  
>> addressing that to you - unless you post under several different  
>> screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once  
>> suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely,  
>> through software or via the Internet.
>>
>> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation  
>> where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that  
>> many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know  
>> about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have  
>> presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the  
>> authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it  
>> is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as  
>> you or a lot of other people can do.
>>
>> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a  
>> little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this  
>> much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that  
>> my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>>
>> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less  
>> computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made  
>> those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to  
>> know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of  
>> occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did.  
>> Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router  
>> remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>>
>> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at  
>> "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much  
>> stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear  
>> router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was  
>> at ground zero.
>>
>> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless  
>> adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the  
>> wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving",  
>> "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the  
>> wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged  
>> in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should  
>> try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've  
>> never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>>
>> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press  
>> it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the  
>> option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use  
>> wireless.
>>
>> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain  
>> at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located  
>> inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly  
>> you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are  
>> 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>>
>> ~Svetaswan
>>
>> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the  
>>>> power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you  
>>>> telling me that I could do this
>>>
>>> Svetaswan,
>>>
>>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/  
>>> ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>>
>>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of  
>>> the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on  
>>> your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop  
>>> have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>>
>>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a  
>>> distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell  
>>> phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be  
>>> similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the  
>>> control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

emraware
In reply to this post by steve
Good choice of wool.  All-cotton ones have flame retardants these days.  You can smell it.  I think you have to get a dr's note to buy  an organic cotton mattress.  

--- In [hidden email], "torch369" <torch369@...> wrote:
>
> Bed wise I am thinking of getting an organic futon that has wool in it so no fire retardant is needed on top of a wooden bed
> Steve

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

Elizabeth thode

 
Hey, I got one for my daughter from the below place. And didn't need a dr's note.
Check it out!
Natural and Organic Mattresses : Futons
 
Providing natural and organic mattresses, furniture, cribs, bedding and other products to Michigan and Northern Ohio. Located in Farmington Hills not far ...www.downtoearthhome.com/Products/?category...futons - Cached - Similar

 Lizzie


To: [hidden email]
From: [hidden email]
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:45:16 +0000
Subject: [eSens] Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)


 



Good choice of wool. All-cotton ones have flame retardants these days. You can smell it. I think you have to get a dr's note to buy an organic cotton mattress.

--- In [hidden email], "torch369" <torch369@...> wrote:
>
> Bed wise I am thinking of getting an organic futon that has wool in it so no fire retardant is needed on top of a wooden bed
> Steve



     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

adiaha22
In reply to this post by Elizabeth thode
Sounds like me, when people have plugged their phones in the outlet near me to charge-- like someone stepped into the middle of my brain. PC

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Elizabeth thode <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Elizabeth thode <[hidden email]>
Subject: RE: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 12:43 PM


 




Amen sister! I applaud your fire!
The other day I stood in front of a cash register that had a DECT phone (cordless) and base right in front of me. The poor cashier
had her brains frozen over the transaction of deducting 20 % off the bill.....she was so embarrassed. I ended up helping her
do the math. The boss was standing right next to her, and he couldn't do the math either, or operate the register to deduct
the 20 % off. A day later, I had the worse radiation hang over I've ever had to date. These people do not have a clue that
those dect phone bases are literally like standing within the shadows of a very powerful cell antenna!
Lizzie


To: [hidden email]
From: [hidden email]
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 09:33:37 -0700
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi

Wow,

This reality of ours really hits on the theme of power vs. powerlessness. I, too feel powerless at times... at home, because of all the extraneous electronic noise that comes in from the busy street that I live on and the residents and visitors with cell phones and bad attitudes within the house which seem to be multiplied by the microwaves. But also at work (a hospital) where laptops are in multiple usage and WIFI is available to all and cell phones rule the roost.

I feel a bit better now since getting some of the fabric manufactured by LessEMF at 50db atttenuation. Where I used to confront people all the time as they would near me with cell phones (new age weaponry to my body) and push their friggin'laptops right up to my work area.

The loose piece of fabric only helps to make me more tolerant, but doesn't completely protect me. I need to have a wardrobe made. Metallic threads are very expensive to make into garments. One must crawl before walking.

Parents do exert a considerable amount of influence as do one's boss and one's spouse, even one's children have influence. Andrew is right when he says we must be empowered. Maybe that's why some of us came down with this thing. We are the vanguard. Sadly, we are the ones who are forced to listen to and embrace the microwave warnings because everyone else thinks that any harm may be a decade away, if at all...and we know right now that harm is being done.

Parents are at potential risk as well, especially from cell phones. There is just no way to ride two horses with one butt. I truly believe that we will become empowered and I am so happy to see those of us making strides to change this dismal future. But if we don't who will?

Global society is deaf, dumb and blind (consciously) to what may very well rivot our human genome over the next 50 years. Cigarettes ain't seen nothing. FiGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, or maybe perish! These are fighting words in a time where war has been silently waged against us.

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 8:37 AM

So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did. Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: wi-fi

adiaha22
In reply to this post by evie15422
Diane,
 
Thanks so much for your advice. I was wondering how much baking soda you suggest for the bath? There's something else about the relationship between lemon juice and purified water and making the body more alkaline.  I never got the ratio correct (how many parts lemon juice to what amount of water). PC

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Evie <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Evie <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 2:29 PM


 



Hi, Pamela,
 
Have you ever tried bathing in baking soda?  Wow, you are in a very acidic environment, daily.  Baking soda bathing will not do wonders, but it should help some.  Raising your pH in other ways might help also.  (Soak your hair in the baking soda, too, but
don't wash your hair with shampoo or your body with soap after soaking in bathing soda, btw; just shower off and rinse the soda off.) 
 
Raising your body frequency, chi, whatever you want to call it--and pH--are each empowering to a person, also.  Some people just exude power; do you know what I mean?  When they walk into a room, without doing anything consciously, they just own the space and you know they are a force to be reckoned with.  Another person can walk into a room and you know they are a push over.  As Westerners, we think of empowerment as being something we consciously work for or do.  In Eastern countries, they emphasize empowerment from within.  Both might be needed, but I see a difference in my life luck-wise (how easily things flow for me), and in how people treat me (who do not know me), AND ES-wise just from improving my pH and trying to bring more good chi and good frequencies into my life.
 
Hope this helps you,
Diane

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, pamela clemonts <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: pamela clemonts <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 12:33 PM

 

Wow,
 
This reality of ours really hits on the theme of power vs. powerlessness.  I, too feel powerless at times... at home, because of all the extraneous electronic noise that comes in from the busy street that I live on and the residents and visitors with cell phones and bad attitudes within the house which seem to be multiplied by the microwaves.  But also at work (a hospital) where laptops are in multiple usage and WIFI is available to all and cell phones rule the roost. 
 
I feel a bit better now since getting some of the fabric manufactured by LessEMF at 50db atttenuation. Where I used to confront people all the time as they would near me with cell phones (new age weaponry to my body) and push their friggin'laptops right up to my work area.
 
The loose piece of fabric only helps to make me more tolerant, but doesn't completely protect me.  I need to have a wardrobe made.  Metallic threads are very expensive to make into garments.  One must crawl before walking.
 
Parents do exert a considerable amount of influence as do one's boss and one's spouse, even one's children have influence.  Andrew is right when he says we must be empowered.  Maybe that's why some of us came down with this thing.  We are the vanguard.  Sadly, we are the ones who are forced to listen to and embrace the microwave warnings because everyone else thinks that any harm may be a decade away, if at all...and we know right now that harm is being done.
 
Parents are at potential risk as well, especially from cell phones.  There is just no way to ride two horses with one butt. I truly believe that we will become empowered and I am so happy to see those of us making strides to change this dismal future.  But if we don't who will? 
 
Global society is deaf, dumb and blind (consciously) to what may very well rivot our human genome over the next 50 years.  Cigarettes ain't seen nothing. FiGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, or maybe perish!  These are fighting words in a time where war has been silently waged against us.

--- On Mon, 5/23/11, Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Andrew McAfee <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: wi-fi
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, May 23, 2011, 8:37 AM

 

So you are saying that you HAVE to stay somewhere that has Wi-Fi and you cannot turn it off because the social order is such that it is better to have it on than suffer the emotions/relationship problems to turn it off?

That pisses me off that you would allow that condition in your life and not value yourself enough to take care of your self either by leaving or waking these people up to your reality.

You can see this triggers my emotions and so obviously has nothing to do with you.

Get creative with your solutions. Simply remove/unscrew the antennas from the Wi-Fi router and use cables/cords to the computers. They have 50-100 foot long cables that can run all over the house to where ever people think they need to have computer access. Download speed will be much higher and access to your computer much more secure.

You may still need to wrap the router in silver mesh to stop the residual emissions but this is a hell of a lot better than being radiated 24/7.

At night, get a timer to shut off the router from 11-6am unless someone is looking at porn all night and doesn't want it off.

Don't settle for this crap. Do something to change your situation.

Andrew

On May 23, 2011, at 6:13 AM, svetaswan wrote:

>
>
> Emraware,
>
> You seem to have assumed that I was referring to you. I wasn't addressing that to you - unless you post under several different screenames that I'm not aware of? It was someone else who once suggested that I could disable the wireless router remotely, through software or via the Internet.
>
> And like I've said several times before, I'm in a living situation where I don't have the power to make the household decisions that many of you may take for granted. So it's not that I don't know about the dangers of wireless - which is what you seem to have presumed - it's just that I can't do much about it. If I had the authority, I would have gotten rid of WiFi a long time ago. As it is, I have to do what is within my power - which isn't as much as you or a lot of other people can do.
>
> I may not be able to get rid of WiFi - but at least I can make it a little more "comfortable". It's a good thing that I can do this much - or I would probably be in a *very* bad place now (not that my situation is exactly good or safe now).
>
> It's a good thing that my parents are in some ways even less computer savvy than I am - they didn't even realize that I had made those changes to the WiFi settings. They wouldn't have ever had to know....but I did end up mentioning it to them on a couple of occasions. They still may not fully understand what I did. Apparently they don't even care that much - as long as the router remains on and the computers can still access the Internet.
>
> Our router is located in the basement - so we're not exactly at "ground zero"...but it seems to be a very strong router - much stronger than our old Comcast router (which was the white, Netgear router). I don't remember feeling the Comcast router, unless I was at ground zero.
>
> There appears to be an option where you can command the wireless adapter to operate on lower power. There are 4 settings for the wireless adapter: "maximum performance", "low power saving", "medium power saving", & "maximum power saving". Apparently, the wireless adapter is on the "maximum performance" when it's plugged in - then goes to "low power saving" on battery. I guess I should try to lower these settings and see how my computer does - I've never tried "medium power saving" or "maximum power saving".
>
> There is even a button on the computer itself where if you press it, it turns off the wireless adapter. But I don't really have the option of turning it completely off - I pretty much have to use wireless.
>
> In the manual for this computer - it is recommended that you remain at least 8 inches from the wireless antenna - which is located inside of the upper margin of the screen, apparently. Supposedly you are within the government's "safe" exposure limits when you are 8 inches away - although that's probably not saying much...
>
> ~Svetaswan
>
> --- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing that I finally started doing was dialing down the power output of our satanic AT&T WiFry router. I remember you telling me that I could do this
>>
>> Svetaswan,
>>
>> I don't remember ever suggesting this. I use a wired router w/ ethernet cables instead of a wireless router.
>>
>> Even if you lower your Wi-Fi router's power, that's only half of the equation. Your dominant exposure is probably from Wi-Fi on your laptop-- which would be right next to you... Does your laptop have a similar "dial-down" option?
>>
>> One acquaintance of mine tested a wi-fi router and found at a distance of 1 meter, the radiation was the same as that of a cell phone held directly to the head. I think some laptops might be similar? IMO, one should "disable" Wi-Fi on the laptop via the control panel, network settings. That's the best.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Swedish law! What about our Human Rights in our Countries?

Christina Steils
In reply to this post by Elizabeth thode




In Sweden, electrohypersensitivity
 (EHS)* is an
officially fully recognized functional impairment (i.e., it is not regarded as
a disease, thus no diagnosis* exists; N.B. This is not special for Sweden, the
terms "functional impairment" and "disease" are defined
according to various international documents (see below)). Thus, the first step
for a person in Sweden with a functional impairment is to contact the
municipality’s special civil servant for disability issues, as well as the
various handicap organizations and authorities, to achieve accessability
measures of various types with the sole aim to have an equal life in a society
based on equality (according to the The UN 22 Standard Rules on the
Equalization of Opportunities for People with Disabilities - since 2007
upgraded into The UN Convention on Human Rights for Persons with Functional
Impairments, http://www.un.org).

 

[*It’s symptoms are classified as an
occupationally-related symptom-based diagnosis (code ICD-10) by the Nordic
Council of Ministers since 2000. DIVS: 2000:839; ISBN: 92-893-0559-2http://www.nordclass.uu.se/verksam/yrke_s.htm]

 

Persons with the functional impairment
electrohypersensitivity have their own handicap organization, The Swedish
Association for the Electrohypersensitive (http://www.feb.se; the website has an English
version). This organization is included in The Swedish Disability Federation
(Handikappförbundens SamarbetsOrgan; HSO; http://www.hso.se;
the site has an English short version). As a consequence of this, The Swedish
Association for the Electrohypersensitive receives an annual governmental
subsidy.

 

In Sweden, impairments are viewed from the point of
the environment. No human being is in itself impaired, there are instead
shortcomings in the environment that cause the impairment. Thus, it is the
environment that should be “treated”! This environment-related impairment view
means that even though one does not have a scientifically-based complete
explanation for the impairment electrohypersensitivity, and in contrast to
disagreements in the scientific society, the person with
electrohypersensitivity shall always be met in a respectful way and with all
necessary support with the single goal to eliminate the impairment.

 

An impairment is - by definition - not defined by
someone else or proven by certain tests, etc. The impairment is always personal
(private) and develops when in contact with an inferior environment.

 

[N.B. Remember that functional impairments are only
based upon each individual’s impaired accessability to - and contact with - an
inferior environment (cf. the UN), thus, there is actually no need for any
“recognition” in local laws (cf. the UN). In Sweden, the former Minister of
Health and Social Affairs, Lars Engqvist - as a member of the previous
government - anyhow gave his “approval” in a letter dated May, 2000
[Regeringskansliet 2000-04-06, Dnr S2000/2158/ST]. He also made it clear in his
response that for EHS persons there are no restrictions or exceptions in the
handicap laws and regulations. Thus, these laws and regulations are to be fully
applied also for EHS persons.]

 

Treating members of the community equally is not
something that should be done as a favour; nor is it something that any
parliament or government should politely request other inhabitants to provide
others with. Equality is not something to be done “out of the goodness of one’s
heart”. It is something one does because it is expected of every citizen,
because inaccessibility and discrimination are prohibited by law. Thus, it is
not alright to deliberately make your symptoms worse. This implies that the
person with electrohypersensitivity should have the opportunity to live and
work in an electrosanitised environment. To force a person to quit one's
employment or to move from one's home is a serious legal violation.

 

The electrically hypersensitive must therefore, in
every situation and by all available means, demand respect¸ representation and
power. They shall very clearly reject all approaches which reflect 
a mentality
of “feeling pity for them” or “caring for them”. Inaccessibility is not a
personal problem. It is a problem for society. Inaccessibility is not about
attitudes. It is about discrimination. And discriminatory actions and conduct
shall not be dealt with 
by well-meaning talk about treatment. Discrimination
is already illegal!

 

This view can fully be motivated in relation to
national and
international handicap laws and regulations, including the UN
22
Standard Rules/UN Convention and the Swedish Action Plan for 
Persons with
Impairments (prop. 1999/2000:79 “Den nationella 
handlingplanen för
handikappolitiken – Från patient till medborgare”; Proposition 1999/2000:79,
1999/2000:SoU14). Also, the Human Rights Act in the EU fully applies.

 

I say, there must be an end to nonchalance, lack of
consideration, indifference and lack of respect on the part of society. Never
accept discriminatory treatment or an insulting special treatment. Stand up for
other’s rights and in this way you’ll stand up for your own future!

 

I would like to quote the very wise words of Jan
Åberg, a freelance writer in Trollhättan, Sweden, “Everything that happens to
us human beings only happens as long as we accept it”. For how long will your
authorities and their civil servants accept it? Would they demand the same type
of proofs if it was about themselves, their children, mother, father…?

 

Finally, remember we all must adhere to and follow all
the handicap laws and regulations. To do the opposite is a serious violation
and should immediately be reported/filed as an official legal complaint to your
local authorities, parliament, government, the EU and the UN. This is of
particular importance since Katri Linna, the former Swedish
Diskrimineringsombudsman (=the Equality Ombudsman), clearly states in the
newspaper Sydsvenskan (January 23-26, 2009; http://sydsvenskan.se/chattarkiv/article408013.ece)
that “electrohypersensitivity is – according to the law – a functional
impairment and I recommend EHS persons that are discriminated to file a
complaint”.

 

In addition, please, also note the following governmental
documents (in Swedish).

The Swedish Association for the
Electrohypersensitive gets a governmental subsidy as a handicap organization
according to SFS 2000:7 §2 (SFS = The Swedish Governmental Statute-Book)
[Regeringsbeslut 950621 nr. 8, Dnr: S1995/2965].

EHS persons’ right to get disablement
allowances has been settled in the The Swedish Supreme Administrative Court,
i.a. in the judgement 
”dom 2003-01-29, mål nr. 6684-2001″.

Here are, in addition, two cases when two
people with EHS - through the
conclusions in courts - getting the right to
support (from the state).

“Kammarrättens i Jönköping dom 2002-05-15 i mål
nr 2644-2001 ang bilstöd till Maria G., född 1966, bl.a. elöverkänslighet.”

“Kammarrättens i Göteborg dom 2007-07-11 i mål
nr 1229-07 ang. bilstöd för SP, född år 1953. (Länsrätten i Göteborgs dom
2007-01-18
i mål nr 1582-06).”

 

Kindly Translated by Olle Johanson




(Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.

The Experimental Dermatology Unit

Department of Neuroscience

Karolinska Institute

171 77 Stockholm

Sweden

 

&

 

Professor

The Royal Institute of Technology

100 44 Stockholm

Sweden)






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

steve
In reply to this post by emraware
supposedly if it has wool in it you don't need the doctor's note since it is a natural flame retardant

--- In [hidden email], "emraware" <emraware@...> wrote:
>
> Good choice of wool.  All-cotton ones have flame retardants these days.  You can smell it.  I think you have to get a dr's note to buy  an organic cotton mattress.  
>
> --- In [hidden email], "torch369" <torch369@> wrote:
> >
> > Bed wise I am thinking of getting an organic futon that has wool in it so no fire retardant is needed on top of a wooden bed
> > Steve
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

steve
In reply to this post by Elizabeth thode
I can't seem to get the website to come up for some reason

--- In [hidden email], Elizabeth thode <lizt777@...> wrote:

>
>
>  
> Hey, I got one for my daughter from the below place. And didn't need a dr's note.
> Check it out!
> Natural and Organic Mattresses : Futons
>  
> Providing natural and organic mattresses, furniture, cribs, bedding and other products to Michigan and Northern Ohio. Located in Farmington Hills not far ...www.downtoearthhome.com/Products/?category...futons - Cached - Similar
>
>  Lizzie
>
>
> To: [hidden email]
> From: emraware@...
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:45:16 +0000
> Subject: [eSens] Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> Good choice of wool. All-cotton ones have flame retardants these days. You can smell it. I think you have to get a dr's note to buy an organic cotton mattress.
>
> --- In [hidden email], "torch369" <torch369@> wrote:
> >
> > Bed wise I am thinking of getting an organic futon that has wool in it so no fire retardant is needed on top of a wooden bed
> > Steve
>
>
>
>      
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)

Elizabeth thode

www.downtoearthhome.com/
 
Try this one, or type in: downtoearthhome  *(down to earth home )
organic mattresses, michigan.
Pretty sure they can ship anywhere in the US, if I remember correctly, this woman
orders  from the company that makes them. She says she goes "on site" to an Amish
farm that actually makes the futons, not sure if this is total truth.
In any case, the one we got was perfect...although pricey.
Lizzie

 


To: [hidden email]
From: [hidden email]
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 14:49:00 +0000
Subject: [eSens] Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)


 



I can't seem to get the website to come up for some reason

--- In [hidden email], Elizabeth thode <lizt777@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> Hey, I got one for my daughter from the below place. And didn't need a dr's note.
> Check it out!
> Natural and Organic Mattresses : Futons
>
> Providing natural and organic mattresses, furniture, cribs, bedding and other products to Michigan and Northern Ohio. Located in Farmington Hills not far ...www.downtoearthhome.com/Products/?category...futons - Cached - Similar
>
> Lizzie
>
>
> To: [hidden email]
> From: emraware@...
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:45:16 +0000
> Subject: [eSens] Re: My computer situation (update, w/ "recommended" computer)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Good choice of wool. All-cotton ones have flame retardants these days. You can smell it. I think you have to get a dr's note to buy an organic cotton mattress.
>
> --- In [hidden email], "torch369" <torch369@> wrote:
> >
> > Bed wise I am thinking of getting an organic futon that has wool in it so no fire retardant is needed on top of a wooden bed
> > Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

1234