Conference moira::parenting_v3

    I had this same concern when I got pregnant.  I've read conflicting
    articles about radiation emission.  Some say that it is a problem,
    others say that the amount is so minute that it wouldn't cause
    problems.  Therefore, I don't think it's going to help you to do
    research because you'll come up with strong arguments for both sides.
    
    Now, if you are concerned, I do have a solution.  I have an anti-glare,
    anti-radiation emission shield on my terminal screen.  I ordered it
    through an office supply company.  I think it cost about $150.00. 
    Yeah, it's expensive but if you spend a lot of time at a terminal and
    worry about it, it's worth it.  I also like it's anti-glare effect.  I
    find that my eyes are less tired at the end of the day.
    
    If you want to know the name of the place to order this from, send me
    mail and I'll let you know.  These things are probably available at
    many office supply companies.  Be aware though that not all anti-glare
    screens are anti-radiation.  They have to state that they are.
    
    Nancy

    I want to add one thing.  I don't think that radiation emission is an
    issue when the terminal is off.  Also, if you are just reading mail,
    and your baby is not sitting directly in front of or behind the
    terminal,  it's also probably not an issue.  
    
    Nancy

    I have discussed this issue with my doctor throughout 2 pregnancies. 
    He says the evidence is inconclusive, but recommended sitting at least
    12 inches from the tube and turning it off whenever it is not in use.
    I also called the Pregnancy/Environmental Hotline in Boston (sponsored
    by the Mass Dept of Public Health and the Genesis Fund).  They gave me
    the same information as my doctor.
    
    The other issue is electro-magnetic emissions.
    
    Just one more thing to worry about!
    
    Penny
    
    

Re: .3

Electro-magnetic emissions is the only issue.  There is no other kind of
emission from video terminals.  Don't get confused by the word "radiation" -
there is no form of radioactivity produced by terminals.

If you keep in mind that what emissions there are decrease in intensity
according to the square (or is it the cube?) of distance.  Keeping 12 inches
away from the screen is certainly more than adequate.  Also, black and white
terminals have far lower emissions than do color terminals or workstations.

				Steve

Question for base noter:  are you equally concerned about keeping your child
away from your television?

    In fact, the incidental e-m radiation from a typical colour tv,
    microwave, radio, baby monitor, cordless phone are all on a par
    with the emissions from a monochrome terminal.  We are surrounded
    by e-m radiation from more sources than I care to think about.
    Live near a radio transmisson tower ?  Live near a hospital ?
    Live near a garage doing arc welding ?  Do you use light dimmers
    at home ?  Some flourescent lights emit high-frequency e-m
    radiation when the gas is ionized ...  Got a VCR ?  Got a video
    game ?  
    
    The list goes on and on and on ... So where does this leave you ?
    To reduce possible hazards, keep your distance from all these
    electrical devices.  As stated earlier the strength decreases as
    approximately the square of the distance, so the strength at 1' is
    a quarter the strength at 6" and a 16th the strength at 3".  Note
    that there is some radiation too from most keyboards, so, for example
    I won't use it in my lap (I don't like to anyway, but this reinforces
    it.)
    
    Frankly, I wouldn't worry ... probably the stress from the worry
    will cause you as much damage as the radiaition !
    
    Stuart

    I was concerned about this, too, during my recent pregnancy.  My
    daughter turned out just perfect.  What a relief and a joy.
    
    There was a lot of publicity last year about the Macintosh terminals
    being worse than others.  Anyhow, the consensus was to keep the
    terminal at arms length or about 18".  Also to sit so your belly is
    lower than the terminal screen, since rays disperse a lot going up or
    down.  By the way, there's some emissions from the back, and maybe the
    sides too, I read.  The earlier note is correct - TV tubes are the same
    technology as computer tubes.  All are cathode ray tubes (CRT's).  The
    new flat screens are a different technology.
    
    I didn't know that keyboards might be a problem - I thought it was just
    the tube.  Maybe our DEC hardware engineers will put some further
    guidance into this note.
    
    There was recently news about a dispute over a potential EPA report on
    the hazards of high tension wires (the electrical trunk lines on the
    big towers).  Seems the researcher felt they are clearly hazardous but
    there was pressure to change his wording.
    
    L

The difference in between tubes and so on is the frequency of the emissions.
The CRT (cathode ray tube) because of the way it works, will generate some
amount of x-ray emissions (x-rays are very high frequency emissions).

The more "lit" spots on your screen, the higher the emission of x-rays ...
hence why a Mac is a problem, becasue they work black on almost paper white.
I much prefer to use white on black for this reason.  Also, have adequate
contrast and brilliance, but avoid excesive brightness.  Higher brightness=
more x-rays.

All e-m radiation is of concern, and all have slightly different known and
unknown effects on living tissue.  So, just use common sense based on the
information about distance and intensity.

As for "in the same room" for a child ... this is most unlikely to cause
any problems.


STuart

    I'm very interested in this issue, as I'm considering changing systems
    from a DECmate III (with an 11" diagonal measure monochrome screen) to
    an available VAXstation (with a 19" color screen).  
    
    Are there figures available on the amount of electro-magnetic
    radiation produced by Digital products?  Is there a group that deals with
    environmental hazards in the workplace?  How can I get information to
    help me make a decision? 
    
    And what about the engineers I see with two and sometimes *three* 
    workstations crowded into their offices? Three screens, three system
    boxes, storage, peripherals .... Maybe I shouldn't worry about just
    having one workstation!   

    
    I happen to be one of those engineers with multi screens in my office.
    At one point I had 2 color workstations, 1 b/w workstation and 2
    VT220 in my office. So far, I haven't heard anything conclusive
    about radiation. I know you can get lead aprons from somewhere. 
    But, I am not too concern about it right now. (I'm happy that I
    have a job :-))
    
    
    
    Eva.  

I keep a pretty good inventory in my office and lab space, too.  It's
probably important to take a reality check every so often.  People have
been working in strong electromagnetic, electrostatic and RF fields for
decades.  If there were something *really* ugly hiding out there, it
would be apparent in the medical records. However, in studies trying to
take  a position on the subject, the interaction (if it exists) is so
slight that it's almost obscured by statistical uncertainty.

There are many well-documented problems that can arrise in strong
electromagnetic/static/RF fields, but you're not exposed to any of
those extremes from a terminal, workstation or television. 

It's one of the sad facts of science that you can't prove something is
safe, you can only show that there is no evidence that it is harmful. 
Whereas claims that something is dangerous make headlines, statements
that is has not been shown to be harmful don't sell newspapers.  And
the fact that it can't be *proven* that it's safe means there is always
room for doubt in the public mind. Which can be used to sell papers in
the slow season, since the media has mastered the art of whipping a
small doubt into a full-blown phobia.

                                          >>>==>PStJTT

The hitch in all the studies and assessments is that, when you are dealing
with low level e-m radiation, near background levels, it is very dificult
to say that the radiation has had a noticeable effect, because there are
so many other possible factors.  For example, does increasing certain
mineral levels in the body have an effect and so on.  There are just too
many variables.

And yes, there are people who have lots of terminals in their office.

Have you flown recently ?  If so, did you know that you've had a radiation
dose equivalent to about 10 chest x-rays (depending on its duration) from
cosmic rays ?

When dealing with comparatively low levels of radiation, and low incidences
of problems, that you can make the numbers prove almost anything.  There are
a number of other factors that workers using crts can suffer from that can
also cause health problems ... like posture and stress ...  Is it the CRT,
the desk / terminal ergonomics or the job ?

So, as I stated before ... don't take unnecessary risks, but don't worry about
them either.

Stuart

Re: .10

Lead aprons won't matter.  They shield against X-rays, but since the
advent of solid-state power supplies in the early 70's, X-ray emission
from TVs and CRTs is essentially zero.

Re: .6

I disagree with Stuart Brook on monochrome vs. color.  Monochrome CRTs
and TVs use a much lower voltage than do color models.  Also, keyboards
are very low voltage (5V or so) and I can't imagine much of anything
being detectable.

			Steve

    Yes, there is a # in Digital that can send out info on radiation on our
    products.  I had a similar concern going from a vt220 to vt1200 - he
    (Bill Henry) said that there was no notable difference in the amount of 
    radiation put out by this unit.  They have letters all made up to send
    out to customers w/ concerns.
    
    DTN 276-8130 or 508-493-8130
    
    Sonia

    re .13
    
    On one score ..... oooops ...
    
    I did mean to say that colour crts in general give off more x-ray
    radiation than monochrome.  (Scientifically, what happens is that
    electrons are fired from the back of the tube onto the screen.  When
    that happens, a phosphor dot on the screen is energised and gives off
    visible light.  Unfortunately, as a side effect, x-rays are also given
    off.  Colour TV's and larger screens require higher voltages to
    accelerate the electrons faster to the screen and the faster the
    electron hits, the more x-rays given off.  Colour TVs require the
    faster electrons because the primary colour phosphors require more 
    stimulation than say a white phosphor.  Larger screens require faster
    electrons to help control picture linearity)  Modern crts have much
    improved phosphors and beam control circuitry, thus reducing the
    accelerating voltages required, and also have anti-x-ray radiation
    glass for the screen.  Modern terminal cases have internal grounded
    shielding to reduce other emissions.
    
    As to keyboards ... usually keyboards are "strobed" by hf signals
    to determine which key is pressed (That's how they get away using
    only a few wires on your keyboard cable).  These signal are low in
    power, as Steve points out, but one of the considerations that was
    made by the so-called experts was that the keyboard generally comes
    in much closer to the body (your fingers are there most of the time,
    and it generally sits much nearer the reproductive organs).  Again,
    it's something I wouldn't worry too much about, but it has been
    described as a hazard.  So, when you go to rest your fingers ...
    pull them back from the keys ... it cannot hurt ... a few inches is
    a big difference in field strength.  I doubt whether anyone has as
    yet come up with (or will ever be able to for that matter) a
    correlation between the keyboard and illness from radiation.
    
    
    A lot of words to say ... there are a some difficult to determine
    small risks that can be reduced even further with simple measures ...
    like an anti-radiation glare filter (there are cheaper ones available),
    keeping the brilliance as low as reasonable, but not so low as to
    cause eye strain, and slightly increasing your working distance from
    the terminal.  Your non-working distance from an 'on' terminal is
    probably already sufficiently high as to make no difference to the
    background radiation you receive.
    
    Stuart

The last two years, I have noticed a marked increase of my fellow
workers with wrist and arm problems. I'm in that same group. With
the work stations, physical concentration on the screen instead
of the paper stack has gotten to us in the form of physical semi
to permanent injuries.

My wrist has gotten to a point that I had problems picking up
Sammy (now 30 lbs) with a minor amount of pain. Let alone the
probable damage from the low level E-M all around us. Sort of
like the early beginnings of the uranium radiation of the early
50's; when we know very little of what is safe.

calvin

    Re: .16
    
    I developed problems in my left arm which I attribute to
    a particularly intensive three-month stretch of terminal use.
    Since then, I have been careful of how I hold my wrists while
    I type, and got a doctor's order for a chair with padded
    armrests (the normal chairs they have in Spit Brook are
    enough to make an orthopedist wince), and the condition
    has improved considerably.
    
    My personal view is that electromagnetic radiation from terminals
    and workstations is of low enough levels that I don't believe it's
    worthy of specific concern.  I'm much more concerned about proper
    lighting levels, keyboard, desk and chair design, and the ability
    to take breaks from typing.
    
    				Steve

    Thanks for all the input!  I'm probably worrying too much (it's  a
    dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it ;-) but do keep my daughter far
    away from the television AND terminal as I did when I was pregnant as a
    precaution.  I even avoid the microwave oven!!!

    re .16, .17: wrist pain
    
    .16's pain may well be caused by carrying Sammy!
    
    I've noticed that carrying a child can easily lead to
    wrist pain: the standard "arm around, grip leg with hand"
    carry causes the carrier to bend the wrist in and then
    hold, which is an uncomfortable position to grip in.
    
    Since I've started not using that grip, or consciously
    not bending my wrist, I no longer get that pain.
    
    			-John Bishop

                      <<< Note 651.19 by MINAR::BISHOP >>>
                  -< Might be caused by carrying the child! >-
    
>>>    .16's pain may well be caused by carrying Sammy!
    
   
Thanks, John.

I do believe that IT WAS the mousen attached to my VAXstation
2000. Part of the problem was the death grip that I was choking
the mousen mit my paws.

I was acutally paiking up Sammy on and of about 20 times on
saturday. I generally pick him up by the arm pits then hold him
by a cradle hold that I learned in EMT training back in the dark
ages.

cal