My mother had a favorite saying that rhymed: “All you need from dawn to dawn is someone else to blame it on.” WiFi involves mysterious emissions that you can’t see and that sneakily permeate our environment, and they have become a popular target for blame.
A lawsuit has been filed against the Fay School in Massachusetts on behalf of a 12-year-old boy designated as “G,” alleging that the school violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and failed to use ordinary care for his safety. They allege the school was negligent in failing to make accommodations to protect the boy from extremely high levels of radiofrequency/microwave radiations. He allegedly suffers from Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome (EHS). The family is seeking $250,000 in damages.
After the school upgraded its Wi-Fi system in 2013, G began to have headaches, itchy skin, rashes, nosebleeds, dizziness, chest pains, and nausea. He frequently went to the school nurse and had to leave school early. His symptoms would usually resolve after he had been home for several hours, and he did not experience “the intense symptoms” on weekends and holidays.
Scientific studies are not meant to be amusing, but I laughed out loud when I heard about this one. After all the concern about possible adverse health effects from cell phone use, this study tells us cell phone use can prevent Alzheimer’s, treat Alzheimer’s, and even improve cognitive function in healthy users.
They studied transgenic mice programmed by their genes to develop Alzheimer’s-like cognitive impairment; they used a group of non-transgenic littermates as controls. For an hour twice daily over several months they exposed the entire mouse cage to EMF comparable to what is emitted by cell phones. They tested cognitive function with maze tests and other tasks that are thought to measure the same things as human tests of cognitive function. The authors claim to have found striking evidence for both protective and disease-reversing effects. (more…)
Three kids on the same block were diagnosed with leukemia last year. That couldn’t happen just by chance, could it? There MUST be something in the environment that caused it (power lines, the chemical plant down the street, asbestos in their school, iPods, Twinkies?). Quick, let’s measure everything we can think of and compare exposures to other blocks and find an explanation.
That may be the common reaction, and it may seem plausible to the general public, but it’s not good science.
I have just read a book that does a great job of elucidating the pitfalls of epidemiologic studies, the problematic interface between science and emotion-laden public concerns, and the way environmental hazards have been hyped far beyond the evidence. Hyping Health Risks: Environmental Hazards in Daily Life and the Science of Epidemiology by Geoffrey C. Kabat.
He covers the uses, strengths and limitations of epidemiology, discusses the pros and cons of different study designs, and explains how to judge whether an association is causal.