German Warning About Wifi

[Manopolus]

Here's a good rule of thumb in life, when someone starts talking about Plato's cave, you're about to hear some really stupid crap.

Yes, this does seem a little hokey:

"It's a very primitive mind-set," said Frey. "Plato said we don't see the reality; we see shadows on the cave walls. We've got a lot of people who are seeing shadows and saying this is the reality." He nodded at his water glass. "We now know a human being isn't a bag of water. A human being is a complex organization of electrical fields. Electroencephalograms and electrocardiograms, for example, measure these fields. Every cell has an electrical field across the cell membrane, which is a regulatory interface and controls what goes into and out of the cell. All nerve signals are electric. And between the nucleus and the membrane there is an electrical field, you can measure voltages of individual cells! Electricity drives biology. We evolved in a particular electromagnetic environment"—the magnetic fields from the earth's iron core, the terrestrial magnetism from lodestones, visible light, ultraviolet frequencies, lightning—"and if we change that environment as we have, we either adapt or we have trouble."

I can't see anything specifically wrong other than it's a rather broad/vague analysis, but it sort of reads like the guy took "pseudoscience writing 101" or something.


I suspect this is one of the legitimate cancer studies they're worried about:

http://interphone.iarc.fr/UICC_Report_Final_03102011.pdf

The conclusions aren't particularly convincing however:

Glioma and meningioma

Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with use of mobile phones. There
were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma at the highest exposure levels, but biases and error
prevent a causal interpretation. The possible effects of long‐term heavy use of mobile phones require
further investigation.

Acoustic neuroma

There was no increase in risk of acoustic neuroma with ever regular use of a mobile phone or for users
who began regular use 10 years or more before the reference date. Elevated odds ratios observed at the
highest level of cumulative call time could be due to chance, reporting bias or a causal effect. As acoustic
neuroma is usually a slowly growing tumour, the interval between introduction of mobile phones and
occurrence of the tumour might have been too short to observe an effect, if there is one.

Again, nothing proven... but suggesting further study.

 

[Manopolus]

Same guys who are still stumbling on GMOs, next they might warn people not to use their microwaves?

Microwaves? What about light bulbs? They don't even have any shielding to stop the radiation getting out!

Be nice. It turns out that as predicted my source for this is actually into these sorts of things. Being an ass won't convince anybody.

 

[Mojo]

I have no doubt that patients reported those effects, but that is the same period over which bogus claims were made. How would any patient know that power lines (for example) caused their symptoms as opposed to numerous other causes.

Note the results of a systematic review of blinded provocation studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19681059

 

[Manopolus]

Note the results of a systematic review of blinded provocation studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19681059

Despite the conviction of IEI-EMF sufferers that their symptoms are triggered by exposure to electromagnetic fields, repeated experiments have been unable to replicate this phenomenon under controlled conditions. A narrow focus by clinicians or policy makers on bioelectromagnetic mechanisms is therefore, unlikely to help IEI-EMF patients in the long-term.

Yep, not a surprising conclusion at all. Hypochondriacs apparently do exist... and are easily taken in by woo practitioners and luddite alarmists.

I have an aunt that I swear goes to great lengths to research whatever ailment that she is going to supposedly have next (latest installments: gluten intolerance [but not actual Celiac disease] and restless leg syndrome), so I'm somewhat familiar with this. She's also managed to get my uncle on anti-psychotic drugs that the rest of the family have been kind of wondering if he actually needs. It's sort of hard to know, with her involved.

 

[elgarak]

Funny. I live in Germany and know nothing of this.

Given that the Independent article does not link to sources, I call BS.

 

[Manopolus]

Funny. I live in Germany and know nothing of this.

Given that the Independent article does not link to sources, I call BS.

As already discussed, the original news article was from 2007... so yeah. It doesn't appear to be current, in any case.

 

[Joey McGee]

Be nice. It turns out that as predicted my source for this is actually into these sorts of things. Being an ass won't convince anybody.

Neither will being a pussy... afraid to offend anyone. Why should I act like there is nothing wrong with being a gullible fruit loop scared of your own shadow? I mean, we're all human, hey I used to be a follower of woo and religion, I'll tell you right now it wasn't people being nice to me that convinced me my convictions were wrong... it was the asses

 

[Manopolus]

Neither will being a pussy... afraid to offend anyone. Why should I act like there is nothing wrong with being a gullible fruit loop scared of your own shadow? I mean, we're all human, hey I used to be a follower of woo and religion, I'll tell you right now it wasn't people being nice to me that convinced me my convictions were wrong... it was the asses

Isn't there a middle road?

 

[StevenLeonCooper]

Same guys who are still stumbling on GMOs, next they might warn people not to use their microwaves?

Good example. This is all just a bunch of radiation-related ignorance.

People honestly hear or see the word "radiation" and all they can think about is glowing green monsters, atomic bombs and cancer.

What people need is just a better understanding of Ionizing vs. Non-Ionizing radiation. At least that would give us a new catchphrase to be afraid of and take the heat off microwaves and cell phones, etc.

 

[StevenLeonCooper]

Neither will being a pussy... afraid to offend anyone. Why should I act like there is nothing wrong with being a gullible fruit loop scared of your own shadow? I mean, we're all human, hey I used to be a follower of woo and religion, I'll tell you right now it wasn't people being nice to me that convinced me my convictions were wrong... it was the asses

Good for you but a little tact goes a long way. It's one thing to be blunt and truthful about the ridiculousness of a person's beliefs. It's another thing to just be crude and offensive. People tend to stick their fingers in their ears when you criticize their way of thinking; they tend to just walk away altogether when you call them names.

That being said, I don't feel the comments that Manopolus quoted you on remotely fall into the category of "being an ass". Give me a break; I try to be as polite as possible but when people start making ridiculous claims based on absolutely nothing and trying to spread fear for no good reason, we can't help but be incredulous and a bit sarcastic.

The entire argument of "We don't know if it's dangerous because we haven't studied it so STOP USING IT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!" is utterly ridiculous. Wifi signals have been in use for almost 30 years and it has been used by the public for almost 20. You don't put out a recommendation for your entire country to stop using a 30-year-old technology because just now you've decided that there hasn't been enough research done into its potential health effects. They're not even saying that anyone has found any health effects, that's the most heinous part of their suggestion.

 

[Beerina]

Now that cell phones have been shot down for the umpteenth time last week, the fraudulent talking heads need something else to move on to.

 

[Mojo]

What people need is just a better understanding of Ionizing vs. Non-Ionizing radiation. At least that would give us a new catchphrase to be afraid of and take the heat off microwaves and cell phones, etc.

And light bulbs.

 

[Manopolus]

That being said, I don't feel the comments that Manopolus quoted you on remotely fall into the category of "being an ass". Give me a break; I try to be as polite as possible but when people start making ridiculous claims based on absolutely nothing and trying to spread fear for no good reason, we can't help but be incredulous and a bit sarcastic.

The reason I quoted the two posts I did was because they lacked substance. Neither of these posts increased anybody's understanding of anything, as far as I can tell. At best, they were playing purely to the basic skeptical bias that already exists for most on this forum.

I am fine with a little attitude when actually addressing the topic at hand... but what I quoted was the attitude without the substance.

Actually, the second post may have had slightly more substance than the first (but without really explaining)... so if anything, it was the second (Mojo's) which I may have been slightly wrong in picking out.

...anyway, I'm done chastising. Normally it wouldn't matter, but I linked this discussion for people I know that weren't formerly familiar with this forum. I suppose I could even be reading these posts wrong... hard to tell in this format, admittedly. If my criticism struck you as pointless just ignore it, I guess. It wasn't really meant to be an extreme shaking of the forefinger anyway.

Another way of looking at it is that the particular post of Joey McGee's can generally be considered as a "poisoning of the well" type of argument and even "attacking the arguer instead of the argument" (in violation of the MA) if anyone here was actually posting who was taking the other side (which admittedly didn't actually happen).

 

[StevenLeonCooper]

The reason I quoted the two posts I did was because they lacked substance. Neither of these posts increased anybody's understanding of anything, as far as I can tell. At best, they were playing purely to the basic skeptical bias that already exists for most on this forum.

I am fine with a little attitude when actually addressing the topic at hand... but what I quoted was the attitude without the substance.

Actually, the second post may have had slightly more substance than the first (but without really explaining)... so if anything, it was the second (Mojo's) which I may have been slightly wrong in picking out.

...anyway, I'm done chastising. Normally it wouldn't matter, but I linked this discussion for people I know that weren't formerly familiar with this forum. I suppose I could even be reading these posts wrong... hard to tell in this format, admittedly. If my criticism struck you as pointless just ignore it, I guess. It wasn't really meant to be an extreme shaking of the forefinger anyway.

Another way of looking at it is that the particular post of Joey McGee's can generally be considered as a "poisoning of the well" type of argument if anyone here was actually taking the other side.

The original link was regarding Germany suggesting people stop using wifi because it hasn't been tested enough for health risks. That claim in itself is exactly what you're talking about. They are unfairly demonizing wifi signals based on a lack of information and providing no one with any actual, empirical information about wifi signals.

I don't see how the comments lacked substance. Joey is pointing out that these people are using the same logic as groups that attack GMO foods: they're making stupendous claims not based on facts or based on a distortion of facts. That discredits them and it's worth pointing out.

 

[Manopolus]

The original link was regarding Germany suggesting people stop using wifi because it hasn't been tested enough for health risks. That claim in itself is exactly what you're talking about. They are unfairly demonizing wifi signals based on a lack of information and providing no one with any actual, empirical information about wifi signals.

I don't see how the comments lacked substance. Joey is pointing out that these people are using the same logic as groups that attack GMO foods: they're making stupendous claims not based on facts or based on a distortion of facts. That discredits them and it's worth pointing out.

This may be what you're not seeing... it's a stereotype. Whether it's (usually? sometimes?) correct or not, it's still a stereotype. Here we have the demonized enemy of skeptics everywhere all tied up with a nice little bow. Unfortunately, it tends to accidentally encompass all of those who end up believing it just as effectively as those who profit from it... at least from their point of view.

I suppose we could classify them all as Neo-Luddites if you'd like, but we're sort of painting with a broad brush if we do (and that would actually be slightly more fair, I think, than a vague denunciation). We all generalize to some degree, but I was trying to tone it down a bit... that's all.

 

[MaxMurx]

The quotation is from an article, published by the INDEPENDENT, September 09, 2007. The INDEPENDENT Quotes a recommendation allegedly published by the German Country of Bavaria (by request of the German Environmental Ministry) to avoid WLAN (WiFi) access points in schools and public buildings and to prefer wired solutions.

That part is taken from a question of a deputy of the German Green Party to the government of Nordrhein-Westfalen. The deputy likes to know, what the government of the country NRW intends to do in face of such a recommendation of the Country of Bavaria.

The answer was: the country of Bavaria hasn't issued such a recommendation.

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...arns-citizens-to-avoid-using-wifi-401845.html

http://www.juramagazin.de/Wortlaut-...ndestag-geht-hervor-dass-Drahtlosnetzwerke-in

 

[Solitaire]

Same guys who are still stumbling on GMOs, next they might warn people not to use their microwaves?

Been around for quite a while: The Proven Dangers of Microwaves. Not really worth reading either.

 

[Joey McGee]

Isn't there a middle road?

Sure, here I'm simply taking the piss out of the German government... lol they abstained from a recent EU vote on GMOs, seems they can't figure it out yet! Maybe you should relax

I'm well aware that it's easier to cause people to become more entrenched in their beliefs by saying the wrong thing, here's a handy guide

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Debunking-Handbook-now-freely-available-download.html

The reason I quoted the two posts I did was because they lacked substance.

They were full of substance, that being comedy!

Neither of these posts increased anybody's understanding of anything, as far as I can tell.

But the point had already been made that the belief was bunk so we were having a laugh over it are you that pedantic?

At best, they were playing purely to the basic skeptical bias that already exists for most on this forum.

lol the skeptical forum is skeptical? How are we biased... towards evidence from reputable sources?

...anyway, I'm done chastising. Normally it wouldn't matter, but I linked this discussion for people I know that weren't formerly familiar with this forum.

Where I come from, we make fun of each other for believing stupid crap, or believing something stupid you read on the internet. It doesn't mean we don't like each other, or that we're trying to ruin the other person's day, it's actually just funny when people believe stupid crap! Are you that worried about people's feelings like they are made of glass?

Another way of looking at it is that the particular post of Joey McGee's can generally be considered as a "poisoning of the well" type of argument and even "attacking the arguer instead of the argument" (in violation of the MA) if anyone here was actually posting who was taking the other side (which admittedly didn't actually happen).
This may be what you're not seeing... it's a stereotype. Whether it's (usually? sometimes?) correct or not, it's still a stereotype. Here we have the demonized enemy of skeptics everywhere all tied up with a nice little bow. Unfortunately, it tends to accidentally encompass all of those who end up believing it just as effectively as those who profit from it... at least from their point of view.

You have completely lost me! Me making fun of the German government for being a little kooky when it comes to worries about the environment just is what it is, making fun. Hey, it seems they have backed off the whole wifi thing and simply cant make sense of GMOs like much of Europe.

 

[Manopolus]

You have completely lost me! Me making fun of the German government for being a little kooky when it comes to worries about the environment just is what it is, making fun. Hey, it seems they have backed off the whole wifi thing and simply cant make sense of GMOs like much of Europe.

Ah, so there was some misunderstanding. I didn't even understand that you were talking about the German government in particular. I just generally read it as "people that believe this crap are just plain stupid" or something like that... which kind of back lashed on me with those I was discussing it with elsewhere (I linked the thread).

Anyway, that part of it wasn't even true, as explained in one of the more recent posts. Apparently, the whole thing of the government warning was sort of made up in the first place. I couldn't read MaxMurx's link (my browser wouldn't translate it to English for some reason, and my German isn't as good as it used to be), but I suspect he wasn't wrong.