finickity

Mike Wuerthele said:

finickity said:

Anyone interested in founding their opinion on hard science instead of swallowing whole the opinions of Mike Wuerthele (or anyone else) might like to browse the 5000 or so scientific studies here: http://justproveit.net/studies. There is one heck of a lot of peer reviewed science out there demonstrating the interference of non-natural electromagnetic radiation with the normal functioning of biological processes and I suggest it is time to inform ourselves and think for ourselves. Industry insiders are going to tell you what they want you to hear.

And there is way, way more that demonstrates the lack of interference. I'm familiar with the source you linked. You couldn't have picked a more agenda-based collection source if you had tried - which I expect you did.

Think for ourselves, indeed.

It's also pretty funny how you think I'm an "industry insider."

Certainly the source I linked has an agenda. It's there in its name: "justproveit.net". It's agenda is to offer evidence, including a large number of scientific studies, that some modern technologies are harmful and should not be in general use. i could equally have provided a huge number of other links to the science which suggests phones and routers are unsafe. To preempt anyone claiming "That's just one study" - or being put off by a long list of links - i chose a single site offering 5000 studies...

You write "There's a lot of bad "science" floating around about radio frequency and electromagnetic field exposure from Wi-Fi routers and the wireless network that your iPhone accesses. AppleInsider delves into the subject, and the actual science behind it." Would you care to cite and properly critique what you are dismissing as "bad science"? 

I apologise if I have appeared mistakenly to include you in the category of industry insiders. You did write "AppleInsider delves into the subject", which seems to carry implications...