Article Psychology today 2019 - What is the scientific evidence for the direct harms of EMR?

[Sly Saint]

Several methodological problems in these sensitivity and provocation tests have been noted, which reduce the weight of their conclusions. These methodological issues include initial participant sampling problems, as it is not certain that the participants had credible claims of EHS. Mainly, this is due to a reliance on self-report of EHS from the participants, instead of a thorough examination and consideration of the participants’ problems. An over-narrow selection of outcome measures may have seriously biased the results of these studies. There are also poor control conditions, including a lack of randomisation between sham, and EMR, exposure, and a lack of double-blinding of participants and experimenters. Weak statistical power in many of the experiments means that some of the studies that failed to show a statistically reliable difference between EMR and sham exposure sometimes did so because of participant withdrawal – making a study less than definitive.

Problematically, the symptomatic correlates of EMR exposure are highly similar to those presented by individuals who report other physical and psychological problems, such as: Myalgic Encephalomyelitis18, other environmentally-related disorders19, and even digital-dependency20.

Moreover, there are data suggesting a relationship between EHS and hyperchondraisis21 – which is an area of some controversy. Some have claimed that around 50% of putative EHS cases may result from the presence of co-morbid or primary psychiatric problems19; although it should be noted that, for general environmental sensitivities, up to 40% of cases have plausible environmental causes22.

Furthermore, the personalities, social situations, and co-morbid symptoms, of those who report EHS may themselves influence the nature and severity of the reported symptoms23. All of this makes assessment of the precise nature and actual cause of EHS particularly difficult to establish, and allows easy dismissal of EHS as being causally-related to EMR, or even as existing in its own right..

https://www.psychologytoday.com/int...11/does-mobile-phone-radiation-cause-symptoms

eta: just found it interesting how they identify key methodological errors in the research, only to then replace with alternative theories with equally dodgy research evidence.

 

[rogerblack]

I do wish that the simple research would be done. Find people who say they have EHS. Place a mechanical timeclock in a box to connect and disconnect a battery powered device over the course of a few hours. (Phone set to download/upload a big file). After twenty fifteen minute periods when it may be either on or off, you've got a damn good idea of if they are actually sensitive, or if some other explanation needs found.

 

[rvallee]

Mainly, this is due to a reliance on self-report of EHS from the participants

Please tell me more about the issues with a body of evidence built entirely on self-reports. Be very specific. Even more a body of evidence built on "self-reports" that somehow are more heavily influenced by researchers' biases than what the patients themselves would actually report if they weren't boxed in to answer between several misleading questions. Be super extra specific about the problems with that.

Furthermore, the personalities, social situations, and co-morbid symptoms, of those who report EHS may themselves influence the nature and severity of the reported symptoms

Hey, would look at that, those are self-reports too but somehow relevant because they support the psychosomatic belief system. Almost as if the issue is not with self-reports per se. Anxiety and depression are also self-reports yet that's the only thing going into a diagnosis that is held as irrefutable. Hell, trauma is also self-reported and there are plenty of physicians who will themselves insist the patients experienced it because that's what they personally believe. Sort of self-reportwashing, putting the researcher's or physician's words into a false self-report. No issues there, somehow.

EMR is present everywhere, we are bathed in it for our entire lives. Very likely that attributing illness to it is a simple consequence of seeing medical professionals who insist there is no cause and just trying something, anything. When you insist there is no cause it does not make it so, e.g. peptic ulcers.

There likely is no harm from EMR, but the attribution by many as a cause is a direct consequence of failing to actually find the cause and leaving them out to dry.