As we reported yesterday, the Council of Europe has released a report that recommends that its member states treat the radiation used in wireless communication as a potential health hazard, one on par with cigarettes and genetically modified foods. States are encouraged to take measures to limit exposure, such as encouraging a return to wired phone lines and banning the use of WiFi in schools. Those are pretty radical responses for what remains a purely hypothetical risk—how did the report end up being so extreme?
Fortunately, the report itself provides some hints as to how how its author came to his conclusions. In doing so, it provides a caution about how politicians can take ambiguous science and latch onto some evidence selectively, creating a severely biased perspective. Most worryingly, it shows how they can do their best to ensure that others end up adopting the same perspective.