dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
36
share rss forum feed

big_e

join:2011-03-05

1 recommendation

reply to ExoticFish

You are ignoring the burden of proof

You are asking that science prove a negative, that Wifi does not cause cancer. Then when a study concludes there is no link between wifi and cancer, you dismiss it stating that because science was wrong before these results don't mean anything. So how on earth do you prove that wifi doesn't cause cancer in your worldview?

The burden of proof rests on those who believe that Wifi causes cancer to prove that claim. If there is no proof, then the claim can be dismissed.


Socrates

@comcast.net
I'm not saying this for myself - I don't believe the harm of RF radiation precisely because the good science doesn't back it up. I'm just stating that this is thinking behind those who object to Wi-Fi, smart meters, power lines, etc. You're not going to convince them with science because science rarely strays beyond the evidence and does not make categorical, unhedged statements beyond what the evidence will say. That leaves wiggle room for those who fear that we just haven't found the evidence yet.

moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
said by Socrates :

I'm not saying this for myself - I don't believe the harm of RF radiation precisely because the good science doesn't back it up. I'm just stating that this is thinking behind those who object to Wi-Fi, smart meters, power lines, etc. You're not going to convince them with science because science rarely strays beyond the evidence and does not make categorical, unhedged statements beyond what the evidence will say. That leaves wiggle room for those who fear that we just haven't found the evidence yet.

Microwave ovens emit much larger amounts of EMR (even in their enclosures...enough to disrupt Wi-Fi) and those have been around for decades. Surely, the entire western world would be nothing but walking cancer patients if the harm was that great or prevalent.

Telco

join:2008-12-19
said by moonpuppy:

Microwave ovens emit much larger amounts of EMR (even in their enclosures...enough to disrupt Wi-Fi) and those have been around for decades. Surely, the entire western world would be nothing but walking cancer patients if the harm was that great or prevalent.

The cancer rates in English nations speak for themselves. As does the rate of cancer for Americans located near farms or factories.

However, I don't see how low power radio-waves would be an issue under most normal usage, considering we are bombarded by them through space anyway.


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
reply to big_e
So how on earth do you prove that wifi doesn't cause cancer in your worldview?
Easy. You don't.

The people who believe this aren't looking for proof. They already have all the "proof" they need (in the form of "This is what I think" opinion). Thus, if a scientific study proves them right, they'll tout it as iron-clad proof that they were right all along. However, if a hundred scientific studies find no link, they'll claim the link is there and science just hasn't found it yet.
--
-Jason Levine

moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
reply to Telco
said by Telco:

The cancer rates in English nations speak for themselves. As does the rate of cancer for Americans located near farms or factories.

However, I don't see how low power radio-waves would be an issue under most normal usage, considering we are bombarded by them through space anyway.

So only "English" nations have high cancer rates? Seriously? Care to cite a study or do we have to take your word for it? I guess no one in Europe uses microwave ovens either.

Mango
What router are you using?
Premium
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net
kudos:13
Reviews:
·AcroVoice
·Callcentric
·Anveo
·Shaw
reply to Jason Levine

Until there's proof...

said by big_e:

So how on earth do you prove that wifi doesn't cause cancer in your worldview?

said by Jason Levine:

Easy. You don't.

Bingo. Until there's widely-accepted proof, (if there ever is) I'm going to err on the side of caution and limit the EMR that my kids are exposed to. Can I eliminate it entirely? Not easily. Can I reduce it? Yes, fairly easily.

Will it improve their health? I might find out in 20-30 years.


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
Did you read the part where I wrote "However, if a hundred scientific studies find no link, they'll claim the link is there and science just hasn't found it yet."?

Study after study has found no link. If no link is found repeatedly, how is assuming the link is there and science just hasn't found it yet "erring on the side of caution"? Using that reasoning, you could claim that people shouldn't eat apples since they can cause cancer (science hasn't found a link yet, therefore the link is there waiting to be found), people shouldn't drink water or they'll get diabetes (no link found = be cautious), or people should keep tin foil hats on their heads to protect against solar flares (science says there's no danger and that tin foil hats would do nothing even if there was, but this just means they haven't found the connection yet).
--
-Jason Levine


CrazyFingers

join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO
So, no apples or water, and buy more Reynold's Wrap?
Gotcha.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl...