Archive for the ‘Electro-Sensitivity’ Category

With each and every new or modern technology, there are typically those who, perhaps through either a lack of understanding of that technology or even an antipathy for it openly oppose its establishment and advancement.

This is something we here at Lintbox have encountered before. There are plenty of opponents to new technologies who argue that things such as microwave-emitting cell phone towers cause horrible diseases such as leukemia, autism and birth defects. We learned from our adventures exploring Bill C-51 that there are people who believe pharmaceuticals cause harm rather than treat it. In both examples, the hysteria surrounding these technologies had eventually mutated into incoherent conspiracy theories, arguing that the government establishes cell-phone towers and poisons us with pharmaceuticals to control the population.

This story may not have reached that point yet, however it is still based on hysteria, bad science, and an antipathy (or at the very least, an ambivalence) toward new technology.

Excerpt:

A group in Santa Fe says the city is discriminating against them because they say that they’re allergic to the wireless Internet signal. And now they want Wi-Fi banned from public buildings.

Arthur Firstenberg says he is highly sensitive to certain types of electric fields, including wireless Internet and cell phones.

“I get chest pain and it doesn’t go away right away,” he said.

There are many possible explanations for this phenomenon– hypochondria, a form of confirmation-bias, is the most likely. The most unlikely explanation would be an until-now undocumented allergy to radio wave emissions. The claim is virtually the same as that surrounding cell phone towers: Radio waves harm our bodies.

The prevalence of the 2.4GHz radio band has increased dramatically within the past decade. Commonly-found household appliances such as the microwave, the cordless phone, Bluetooth electronics, cellphones and WLAN routers all use this band in their operation. In short, it’s everywhere. Were Mr. Firstenberg suffering from anything other than the power of suggestion, he would be experiencing chest pain 24/7, as radio waves on the 2.4GHz bandwidth bombard us virtually everywhere, all the time, whether he’s aware of it or not.

Therefore, the claim that his chest pains were caused by the presence of a WiFi signal is quite a clear example of the post-hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy (A WiFi signal was present, then I got chest pains, therefore WiFi signals cause chest pain). Should we then abolish such an incredibly useful technology as WiFi based on virtually no reliable evidence? City Councilor Ron Trujillo summed up the answer quite succinctly:

But City Councilor Ron Trujillo says the areas are already saturated with wireless Internet.

“It’s not 1692, it’s 2008. Santa Fe needs to embrace this technology, it’s not going away,” Trujillo said.

Link.

Probably. There are no definite answers in science; all we can ever know are effects to various degrees of certainty. I was originally planning to write a long follow-up article to criticisms of my original post on cell tower radiation (and I still am), but I thought a bit more of an immediate follow-up would be warranted in light of some of the misunderstandings out there.

Before I go any further, I’ll direct you towards this post by Dr. Steven Novella (a man much smarter than I am) on his NeuroLogica Blog. He has summarized the issue quite nicely, though in a way that may not make you happy if you’re looking for a definitive answer.

So what do we know about cell towers? We know that the science is largely inconclusive. Some of the tests performed have been positive, and some are negative. The science has largely not supported the hypothesis that cell phone radiation is harmful, but there is not enough of a consensus in the data to draw this conclusion. However, it is interesting to note that a bulk of the studies that show harms from cell phone radiation were focused on cell phones as opposed to cell towers. The largest concern right now appears to be an increased risk of developing brain tumors from using cell phones, and even then only over an extended period of time (10+ years).

Many of the studies used by the anti-cell tower crowd are smaller studies, and more prone to statistical outliers affecting the result of the study. Furthermore, many of the studies that suggest major health problems from cell phone radiation exposure are poorly designed. The biggest study used by the anti-cell tower crowd, The Bioinitiative Report, isn’t even a study, but is rather a poorly constructed meta-analysis of previous studies in the field.

One common accusation leveled against studies showing no effects of cell tower/phone radiation is that they were performed by researchers who were in the pocket of telecommunications companies. Aside from this being a non sequitur (whether the test was a good or bad test does not rely on who pays for the test, but rather how the test is carried out and whether the results are accurately reported), this argument wrongly assumes that all previous research into this topic has been influenced by the telecommunication industry, and doesn’t recognize the new research that has been performed completely free of any influence from the telecommunication industry (research which is arriving at the same mixed, but mostly negative, results).

The bottom line seems to be that there’s no reason to be afraid of cell phones, and even less to be afraid of cell towers; and at this point, it isn’t looking likely that there are any serious harms. However, even if it were discovered that cell phone radiation damaged the human body somehow, it would be important to understand the extent of the damage before we could react in any meaningful way. We accept a certain level of danger for convenience on a regular basis (if you know statistics, getting behind the wheel of a car can be a scary experience). The outright banning of cell phones and towers seems to be an unlikely outcome even if it was discovered that they posed a danger. Regardless of the outcome, it’s clear that what is needed in this situation is more research into the topic — not protests and propaganda.

Recently, a new cell tower was erected at a nearby intersection. To most people, this means improved cell reception, fewer dropped calls, and at the very least a brand new flagpole. However, one group of residents was not pleased with this new addition to the neighborhood. Believing that cell towers emit radiation that is harmful to the human body, they gathered to protest the cell tower.

Performing a quick Google search for “cell tower dangers” (and ignoring the results that inform of no harms from cell towers), you will stumble across many sites claiming vague and pseudo-scientific harms that result from living near cell towers. If you dig deep enough, you’ll find sites willing to sell you Orgone generators, which will generate Orgone fields to counteract the harmful rays of cell towers. Dig even deeper and you will find conspiracy theorists who believe that the government uses cell phone signals and radio waves to control our minds.

Let’s not dig that deep.

The protesters were nice enough to set up a website with a list of their claims as to why they believe that cell towers are harmful. Let’s examine what these claims are, and why they are wrong.

Read the rest of this entry »