Wi-Fi Allergy a PR Stunt 174
ADiamond writes "There is no Wi-Fi allergy. The English DJ claiming a Wi-Fi sensitivity, chronicled earlier, was a PR stunt to promote his new album. It would appear that the stunt was highly successful, appearing in multiple high-profile media outlets like The Sun, The Telegraph, and Fox News. The article at Ars goes on to discuss the evidence, or lack-thereof, of electromagnetic spectrum sensitivity."
It's Times Like These ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, very fning funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Now this story will linger as 'common knowledge' for years and rational people will have to cnstantly explain it was a PR stunt.
Well done jackass, you've made the world a worse place.
Re:would suck if someone somewhere was actually (Score:4, Insightful)
It's attitudes like that which keep people reclusive when actually do experience strange things (whether medical, mental, metaphysical -- whatever strange means today).
Some people are attention-whores, for sure. And some of those people make stuff up. The rest of the world, though - they'd probably rather keep their strangeness to themselves, than to be studied like a lab rat.
You're talking about human beings, not creatures which we need to find in order to "be able to study them."
Should be classified as fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
Misleading and deceiving people for notoriety and financial gain. How the fuck is this not fraud?
Re:Oh, very fning funny (Score:3, Insightful)
Both, plus the news outlets covering it. Everyone knows "wi-fi allergy" has already been disproved, which means there is no story. They might as well be running news articles and segments about how some guy claims to have gotten aids from a hug. UNLESS, they're covering it with the same "what a moron" treatment they would give that "woman claims daughter got pregnant from swimming pool" moron. But of course, they didn't. They sensationalized it because that's easier than spending three minutes googling the truth. Most of today's "journalists" can sucking cuck a fock, as far as I care.
Re:Oh, very fning funny (Score:4, Insightful)
He's feeding into a belief. Anyone claiming to ahve this problem while knowing it's not possible is a much bigger jack-ass then people who ignorantly think this can be true.
Of course, the biggest jack asses are the one where you show all the studies and the still refuse to change there minds.
Did I say jackass? I meant moron.
Re:would suck if someone somewhere was actually (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Tried before with success.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Awww.. come on !
The dihydrogen monoxide/hydric acid/hydrane stunt was just *brilliant* !
--Ivan
Re:Should be classified as fraud (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmm. So if I have ads on my blog and I post "misleading and deceptive" blog posts that are "fun to read" or "sensational" (sounds like the mass media), is that fraud? Or how about advertising that implies "If you drink this, you'll get a girl like the one in this ad!"? ...
Summary: I don't see this as being particularly any worse than most publicity. Heh, for that matter, all of Hollywood is misleading and deceptive for the sake of financial gain
Re:would suck if someone somewhere was actually (Score:5, Insightful)
Except they don't suffer from "this" affliction.
If they can't pass a double blind test, then the affliction doesn't exist.
Re:On the contrary (Score:3, Insightful)
He added cement to the idea.
All this stuff, Bigfoot, UFO's, Homeopathy, reiki, only gets stronger when something like this happens. When it is proven to be fake, or shown that there is no evidence, it doesn't get reported in mainstream and when it does it gets put on page 8.
Some legit studies have found effects (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Oh, very fning funny (Score:4, Insightful)
Quick, put it on Snopes.com.
It's the best we can do for now.
Re:It's Times Like These ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to worry, if we use a high enough signal power I'm sure we can get a reaction of some kind.
A few megawatts should just about do it.
=Smidge=
the best we can do is ignore him from now on. (Score:3, Insightful)
...except the damage is done. The hippies and new-agers have already latched onto the story as yet more proof that WiFi is harmful and their neuroses are real.
Stunts like this aren't 'harmless'. We should publicly flog him, not ignore him.
The cure is easy... (Score:3, Insightful)
Put them in a room with a black WiFi box and ask them to tell you when it's switched on, preferably with some other "sensitives" as witnesses and making sure there's no cheating by the weasel-faced skeptics.
Having shown them what a real experiment is, give them one to take home so they can try for themselves whenever they have doubts.
After enough dismal failures they should get the message that it's all in their head.
Re:Cellphone cancer risk (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's look at the facts:
Looking at these facts, it's very likely that Wi-fi (microwave radiation) may cause cancer or some sort of damage if human beings are continuously exposed to it for several decades.
What a logic (Score:3, Insightful)
Putting your head in a boiling pot of water or in a working oven is dangerous as well. Ergo standing several feet away from it is going to kill you as well... NO.
The microwave kills you because it cooks you. In fact, you will be CURED of any cancer because cooked cancer cells are just as dead as anything else that is cooked.
Guns kill, so carrying a gun gives you cancer because cancer is caused by lead and since guns kill with lead... BAD LOGIC.