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