Mobitel u prvom razredu

[ivarica]

ja nisam skuzila u nasoj skoli govornicu
ivar ne nosi mob u skolu, cak je i sam rekao da ga ne zeli nositi (nije mu valjda njegov mob dovoljno cool, sto je jos gore od toga da ga zeli nositi )

imamo brojeve telefona i uciteljice i uciteljice iz boravka pa je situacija bez benzina pokrivena
uciteljica me je zvala sama na mob kad je u skoli s njim bio neki problem (plakanje i sl)

[yaya]

Nema mobitel jer nema potrebe za tim. Škola, stan, moj i mužev posao nam je sve u krugu 15-20 minuta, u školu i na posao idemo pješice ili biciklima tako da se ne može dogoditi da itko ostane bez benzina. Kad je pitala za mobitel rekli smo joj da će ga dobiti kad bude navršila 10 godina i to je to..ne pita i ne plače niti traži. Razmišljam kako bi se i ja vrlo rado riješila mobitela jer ga smatram prilično štetnim po zdravlje i jer narušava privatnost, zato ga koristim vrlo rijetko a ponekad ga namjerno ostavljam doma i ne nosim sa sobom.

[mamaS]

Kopiram link na članak i zaključak u članku koji se odnosi na izloženost djece svim Elektromagnetskim poljima i uporabi mobiltela:

Ukratko Medicinska Preporuka je : ograničite vrijeme poziva, koristite hands free i da je mobitel cim dalje od djecjeg tijela i glave,

The Sensitivity of Children to Electromagnetic Fields
http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/116/2/e303
located on the World Wide Web at:
The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is
rights reserved. Print ISSN: 0031-4005. Online ISSN: 1098-4275.
Grove Village, Illinois, 60007. Copyright © 2005 by the American Academy of Pediatrics. All
and trademarked by the American Academy of Pediatrics, 141 Northwest Point Boulevard, Elk
publication, it has been published continuously since 1948. PEDIATRICS is owned, published,
PEDIATRICS is the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. A monthly
by on October 18, 2007 www.pediatrics.org Downloaded from
SPECIAL ARTICLE

DEVELOPING POLICY FOR CHILDREN AND
PREGNANT WOMEN
In today’s world, technologic developments bring both social and economic benefits to large sections of society; however, the health consequences of these developments can be difficult to predict and manage. Nevertheless, even if the effects are small, a widespread exposure can have large public health consequences. When risks are complex, an established cause-effect relationship is absent, or the scientific findings are not robustly quantifiable, the need for timely preventive action makes a precautionary approach an essential part of policy making. Many societies believe that this is particularly true regarding children (including the unborn child): they represent the future of the society, have the potential for
longer exposure than adults, and yet are less able to manage their own risk.

International guidance on occupational and public exposure to EMFs, described above, is based on avoiding risks to health that are well understood and for which there is good scientific evidence. However,
with regard to childhood exposure to EMFs (and exposure during pregnancy), several factors argue for the adoption of precautionary measures, including the possibility that EMFs might affect children;
the dread with which some of the diseases raised in this context, such as leukemia and brain cancer, are perceived; the involuntary nature of some of the exposure; its extensiveness; and its likely rapid growth in the future.

The WHO International EMF Project (www.who.int/emf) is finalizing a practical framework for guiding policy options in areas of scientific uncertainty that is based on the application of precaution.68 In
general terms, the draft WHO precautionary framework aims to develop a set of public health policy options that can be applied according to the degree of scientific uncertainty and the anticipated severity
of the harm that might ensue from exposure, taking into account the size of the affected population and the cost of exposure reduction. These measures should not be seen as undermining science-based
guidance on exposure; rather, they represent additional steps with application that may vary from country to country depending on social and economic considerations.
Precautionary measures may also be adopted at an individual level, depending on the degree of concern felt by the exposed person. In giving advice to their patients, physicians should weigh the strength of
scientific evidence for the risk, if any, of an adverse outcome, the benefits of the technology, and the feasibility of reducing exposure, as well as the overall health of the patient, which includes freedom from worry and anxiety.
For ELF (power-frequency) fields, there is some evidence that exposure to environmental magnetic fields that are relatively high but well below guidance levels is associated with an increase in the risk of childhood leukemia, a very rare disease (even if the risk is doubled, it remains small at
5–8 per 100 000 children per year). Although the evidence is
regarded as insufficient to justify more restrictive limits on exposure, the possibility that exposure to ELF magnetic fields increases risk cannot be discounted. For the physician faced with questions from, for example, a couple planning a family and concerned about this issue, or from someone pregnant and occupationally exposed to relatively high ELF magnetic fields, standardized advice is not possible. Instead, physicians could inform their patients of possible risk and advise them to weigh all the
advantages and disadvantages of the options available to them (of which EMF reduction is but one consideration). Some simple options include reducing exposure by minimizing the use of certain electrical
appliances or changing work practices to increase distance from the source of exposure. People living near overhead power lines should be advised that such proximity is just an indicator of exposure
and that homes far away from power lines can have similar or higher fields.

Regarding the long-term health effects of mobilephone
use, the paucity of data, particularly for children,
suggests that low-cost precautionary measures
are appropriate, especially because some of the exposures
are close to guideline limits. Physicians
could advise parents that their children’s RF exposure
can be reduced by restricting the length of calls
or by using hands-free devices to keep mobile
phones away from the head and body. On the other
hand, exposure levels from mobile-phone base stations
are extremely low, and therefore precautionary
measures do not need to be recommended.

[žuža]

moja S ga dobila na kraju drugog razreda i super mi dođe da ga ima, a M ga možda dobi na kraju prvog obećo mu tata i nemam ništ protiv

[bucka]

ne čujem :/

gotovo je,najbolje da odem na livadu čekat meteor