Hacker News Reader

Comment by Terr_ | Hacker News Reader

Various double-blind studies involving cell-towers also show no effect. Of folks claiming some kind of electromagnetic hypersensitivity, the greatest sensitivity seems to be whether they can see if a power-light is on or not.

Some may have real symptoms, but the cause is something else inside or outside them.

View on HN

And power lines. I seem to recall reading that some of the health problems may have come from Agent Orange, which was used to clear the power corridor in the 50s

For the longest time I believed that cell tower radiation’s negative impact on living organisms is strictly pseudoscience.

Turns out, back in 2016 a German study[0] has found damage to trees near the towers—starting on the side of the tree facing the tower, then spreading to the entire tree.

This study, of course, does not show whether that measurably harms humans, but I stopped thinking those fears and complaints are completely unfounded.

[0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27552133/

The study's author is a well-known esoteric loonie. You are better of not trusting that study. Context in German: https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Cornelia_Waldmann-Selsam

Interesting, thanks for context. Then, was this particular paper not peer reviewed or did it use suspect methodology?

Peer review doesn't guarantee much of anything, unfortunately.

PubMed is highly problematic in that regard. It means basically nothing in terms of quality or quantity of peer review, but the "nih.gov" part of the URL automatically lends an air of real authority to any link that contains it.

I don't know what you have to do to get a link on PubMed, but it definitely isn't much.

This is interesting (and unfortunate). It boggles my mind how academia makes it possible to publish (and not have to retract) a paper based around facts that are simply made up[0], while some bright and capable people I know don’t have ways to publish (unless, I suppose, they pay to some lesser pay-to-play journals) because they did not choose to be in academia.

[0] Although I have not seen anyone in this thread tell me that this paper is false—it was mostly appeal to author’s preexisting reputation—I’m taking it at face value.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com