Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-raja!merrill
From: merrill@raja.DEC (Rick - Font Mgr. for Hardcopy Engineering)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: VDT's and pregnancy
Message-ID: <3064@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Jul-85 09:30:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.3064
Posted: Thu Jul 11 09:30:09 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 09:04:44 EDT
Sender: lai@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 21

fact: VDT's emit less radiation than TV's.
fact: no scientific group has issued warnings about VDT's
fact: several studies have found isolated instances of problems
	experienced by women, pregnant and not, while using 
	video display terminals (VDTs) that exceed statistical
	expectations.

With a few exceptions these problems are due to POOR POSTURE, FATIGUE,
EYESTRAIN (which causes other stress symptoms throught the body), and
WORRY.  In other words using a VDT is no more harmfull than spending
day after expectant day staring out the window from a chair and worrying
about whether staring out the window could hurt the unborn child.

One INTERESTING exception occured in Sweden when 70% of the workers using
data displays broke out in a rash/allergy around their faces!  The mystery
was finally solved when it was determined that the video display was putting
a STATIC ELECTRIC charge on their bodies (just like a TV set can do) AND there
were areosol paint particles in the air that were attracted to their faces
by the electric charge!

	Rick Merrill