Is Wi-Fi killing trees? Almost certainly not. Next question
Our friends over at The Daily Mail have a story that Wi-Fi might be killing trees in Holland. From the most fleeting of glances at their story – I can't see the research itself, because it hasn't been published – I can confidently tell you it's probably nonsense.
Apparently, in a study of 20 trees exposed to different forms of electromagnetic radiation, those exposed to Wi-Fi at very close range developed damaged bark and a "lead-like" sheen on their leaves caused by cell death. Worrying. And, as the story reports, it "will raise fears that Wi-Fi radiation may also be having an effect on the human body and will lend weight to parents and teachers who have campaigned to stop wireless routers being installed in schools."
It almost certainly will raise those fears, but it shouldn't. For the following reasons.
One, even the scientists who did this research say there's nothing to worry about. As the Mail reports in the 14th paragraph, the Dutch health agency said: "The researcher from Wageningen University indicates that these are initial results and that they have not been confirmed in a repeat survey.
"He warns strongly that there are no far-reaching conclusions from its results. Based on the information now available it cannot be concluded that the WiFi radio signals leads to damage to trees or other plants." So. Nothing to worry about on that front, then.
Two, studies on the effect of Wi-Fi on humans have been carried out, many times. Many people suffer from a condition known as "electrosensitivity", which has unpleasant symptoms including fatigue, tiredness, headaches, concentration difficulties, dizziness, nausea, heart palpitations and digestive disturbances, and which they believe is caused by electromagnetic fields.
So, to discover whether this was true, scientists carried out no fewer than 37 studies, called "provocation studies", to see if sufferers' symptoms really were caused by electromagnetism, or by some other factor. Ben Goldacre has done a brilliant job of examining the evidence here, and he shows that 30 of the studies showed no link, while the other seven's results could not be repeated, were statistical artefacts, or were inconsistent.
Three, these stories come out all the time. Again, as the Mail article points out, last year various news agencies claimed that the mysterious "Colony Collapse Disorder" that was killing bees may have been caused by Wi-Fi. It wasn't. It is currently believed to be caused by a combination of a virus and a fungus.
We love these "electrosmog" stories. They seem to hit a nerve – some Faustian morality tale about the risks of progress, or something. But they turn up regularly, and never have anything to them. Call me crazy, but it seems unlikely that this unpublished study on 20 trees, which even the authors don't think means anything, will be the one to break the sequence.
Fluoride in the water: not a communist plot
January 20th, 2011 14:21
Gay couple win B&B court case: however much it offends religious sensibilities, the law is the law
January 19th, 2011 11:37
Collagen skin creams a waste of money, 'say scientists'. Well, they have been saying it for years
January 17th, 2011 12:01
Feeling the Future: has science proved that we're psychic about porn? No (bet you saw that coming, etc)
January 6th, 2011 21:06
'An elaborate fraud' – the BMJ's damning verdict on Andrew Wakefield and the MMR-autism link
January 6th, 2011 15:26