Last week our Bad Science columnist Ben Goldacre took on the recent Panorama investigation into Wi-Fi. Some of his accusations focused around the programme's choice of expert - Alasdair Philips, a campaigner who runs Powerwatch and EMFields, a company that sells EMF shielding and monitoring devices.
In response to Ben's column, Alasdair has posted what he claims is a rebuttal of everything levelled against him and the programme - I'm only going to suggest that you read it yourself and make your mind up as to whether he's arguing on solid ground.
However, I've got one dumb question that you might be able to answer in the meantime. Is measuring "electrosmog" 100m from a phone mast and 50cms from a Wi-Fi enabled laptop comparing like with like? Why wasn't it either, say, measured a distance from the wireless router or with somebody using a mobile phone?
I'm no scientist but it seems to me that one is a measure of background noise from a distance and one is listening up close to something active. It's like standing on top of a bridge listening to the noise of six lanes of traffic whizz past and then comparing it to the noise when you place your ear against a clockwork mechanism and wind it up. One's going to be louder by design.
Anyway, I digress. One of Powerwatch's stated aims is "reporting about the known science: to enable the general public to have access to clear, independent information as to the hazards of power frequency and radio frequency electromagnetic fields". Reckon they've managed it?
