further wi-fi fun: trading on fear, uncertainty and doubt

Still more nonsense from the Independent on the unproven dangers of wi-fi. A short selection:

The radiation emitted by digital devices such as wifi-enabled laptops has been labelled the "digital equivalent of passive smoking" by some observers.

But which observers? Qualified observers with evidence to support that comparison, or hack journalists who keep using the phrase "electronic smog"?

Still, that's nothing compared to the parasites which the Independents' reporting have pulled out of the woodwork:

[James Fintain Lawler, the head of the technology start-up Exradia] rejected the notion that he was scare-mongering to get his product off the ground , arguing that the World Health Organisation, the European Union and the UK government have all raised concerns about the issue. "We don't sell on fear, uncertainty and doubt . We want to give people the choice to buy a safer phone," Mr Lawler said.

He argued that the human body combats man-made electromagnetic fields - the pulsing signal emitted by digital devices - but continued exposure to such radiation could affect the body's ability to heal.

Given that there's no evidence for that and it's a wildly speculative use of the word "could," it sounds exactly like Lawler is trading on fear, uncertainty and doubt - because he is.

And to conclude:

People concerned with the effect of ambient radiation from wireless networks and digital devices have turned to a variety of bespoke technologies, including the Q-Link pendant and plug-in electromagnetic field protection units for the home.

AAAAAAAAAAGH. While actual research might one day describe the relative risks of wireless technology, I can confidently predict that printing out this blog and papering your walls with it will offer the same level of protection as the Q-Link pendant.