Dark mutterings on killer Wi-Fi in schools help no one
Print storyAn Open Letter to Sir William Stewart
Posted in Public Sector, 24th April 2007 12:08 GMT
Whitepaper - What is the best data center energy storage for you?
What I have found, is dead end after dead end, with enthusiastic positive results giving way to "cannot be replicated" or "not done with double-blind" or "anomalous results" or, most frequently, just nothing.
Most recently, a comment on the newswireless bulletin board pointed me to a press release, issued in April 2005, quoting authoritative research by Austrian scientists. I have a press release naming the researchers: Dr Gerd Oberfeld (Land Salzburg, deptartment of environmental medicine), Dr Hannes Schimke (Salzburg University, EEG-measurements, psychophysiology, statistics) and Prof Günther Bernatzky (Salzburg University, neurodynamics and neurosignalling). The research was supported by Dr Gernot Luthringshausen (permanent member of the ethical commission of Land Salzburg, neurology and psychiatry).
Two years later, and the only reference to this research that I can find is a comment complaining about how badly it was done. It was supposed to be published in a learned journal; I can't find that publication.
The Mast Action people keep writing to me to proclaim such scientific breakthroughs, and every time I try to hunt them down I'm left with empty hands. Probably, I need to try harder - but heck, there's a limit to the amount of time I can spend. I'm not a government scientist. I don't have government money to help me look into the research that has been done and evaluate it scientifically.
The Stewart report did. It looked into every bit of research they could find on a mobile phone's effect on humans, and the published report said: "No hard evidence."
I'm tired of this.
There's a possible explanation in standard conspiracy theory. It says that all research which succeeded in showing real harm to humans was hushed up. The Salzburg University paper? - bought by some GSM consortium, buried. And all the other ones; suppressed. The Stewart report? - he was put under pressure by lobbyists who infiltrated the committee and bribed the scientists. He knows, says this theory, but he's not allowed to show his evidence. All he can do is express his private reservations.
If the conspiracy is that deeply buried, I probably can't expose it. But I can say, along with the anonymous writer of the Independent opinion piece: "Let's do an official study."
Let's spend money, repeat all the research we can find showing Wi-Fi damage to humans, see whether it can be replicated, whether there is any evidence.
And the other thing I can say is: "If you know something Sir William, stop making dark hints and vague anxious noises. Tell us what you think, tell us what you know, or think you know."
And if you can't do that, do stop bleating. ®
Free whitepaper: Calculating total power requirements for data centers
High Zune: MS loads up for the CES shootout
The Year in Operating Systems: No battle of big ideas
Photography: Yes, you have rights
Enormous HP box spotted from space