回答Böhmert等。

Maël Dieudonné
{"title":"回答Böhmert等。","authors":"Maël Dieudonné","doi":"10.1186/s12940-020-00676-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>I thank Böhmert et al. for their commentary of my review, although their criticisms suggest a misunderstanding of its aims and scope. It does not discuss their comprehensive model per se, but as the latest formulation of a hypothesis that was put forward almost 15 years ago, and only as regards its ability to explain EHS symptoms as they are known to occur. While the authors reassert the strengths of their model, they do not properly address the limitations pointed out in my review, pertaining to: (1) the lack of proven explanations for the origins of beliefs in EMF harmfulness; (2) the realism of experimental studies of EHS; (3) the existence of situations contradicting predictions of their model. Thus, while it seems promising, its applicability to EHS remains to be properly demonstrated. A diversification of the methods used to study EHS seems the only way forward.</p>","PeriodicalId":520610,"journal":{"name":"Environmental health : a global access science source","volume":" ","pages":"126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12940-020-00676-w","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Answer to Böhmert et al.\",\"authors\":\"Maël Dieudonné\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12940-020-00676-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>I thank Böhmert et al. for their commentary of my review, although their criticisms suggest a misunderstanding of its aims and scope. It does not discuss their comprehensive model per se, but as the latest formulation of a hypothesis that was put forward almost 15 years ago, and only as regards its ability to explain EHS symptoms as they are known to occur. While the authors reassert the strengths of their model, they do not properly address the limitations pointed out in my review, pertaining to: (1) the lack of proven explanations for the origins of beliefs in EMF harmfulness; (2) the realism of experimental studies of EHS; (3) the existence of situations contradicting predictions of their model. Thus, while it seems promising, its applicability to EHS remains to be properly demonstrated. A diversification of the methods used to study EHS seems the only way forward.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental health : a global access science source\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12940-020-00676-w\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental health : a global access science source\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-020-00676-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental health : a global access science source","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-020-00676-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我感谢Böhmert等人对我的评论,尽管他们的批评暗示了对其目的和范围的误解。它不讨论它们的综合模型本身,而是作为近15年前提出的一种假设的最新表述,仅就其解释已知发生的EHS症状的能力进行讨论。虽然作者重申了他们的模型的优势,但他们没有适当地解决我在评论中指出的局限性,涉及:(1)缺乏对电磁场有害信念起源的证明解释;(2) EHS实验研究的现实性;(3)存在与模型预测相矛盾的情况。因此,虽然它看起来很有希望,但它对EHS的适用性仍有待证明。研究EHS的方法多样化似乎是唯一的出路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Answer to Böhmert et al.

I thank Böhmert et al. for their commentary of my review, although their criticisms suggest a misunderstanding of its aims and scope. It does not discuss their comprehensive model per se, but as the latest formulation of a hypothesis that was put forward almost 15 years ago, and only as regards its ability to explain EHS symptoms as they are known to occur. While the authors reassert the strengths of their model, they do not properly address the limitations pointed out in my review, pertaining to: (1) the lack of proven explanations for the origins of beliefs in EMF harmfulness; (2) the realism of experimental studies of EHS; (3) the existence of situations contradicting predictions of their model. Thus, while it seems promising, its applicability to EHS remains to be properly demonstrated. A diversification of the methods used to study EHS seems the only way forward.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信