Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Drawing on the contested case of electromagnetic hypersensitivity and 5G resistance, I examine how ‘alternative’ researchers, entrepreneurs, therapists, and patients ‘make’ loopholes by exploiting absences at the level of scientific research, technological development, and medical application.

Paper long abstract

Many ‘uncertain’ or ‘rejected’ knowledges – ranging from parasciences, alternative therapies, as well as conspiracy theories – are accused of undermining the scientific consensus through the introduction of unfounded, faulty, deviant or even dangerous beliefs. ‘Alternative’ researchers, entrepreneurs, and (patient) activists can, however, also be understood as actively seeking out lacunae and inconsistencies in the edifice of science, which might provide opportunities for their beliefs to gain the status of accepted (scientific) knowledge and the many socio-economic benefits this incurs. By seeking or ‘making’ loopholes, moreover, such actors make potentially important claims about the shortcomings of existing technoscientific research and innovation.

Drawing on the contested case of electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EMH) and resistance to and rejection of wireless technologies (particularly 5G), this paper examines how EMH researchers, entrepreneurs, therapists, and patients endeavour to find and create loopholes at the level of scientific research, technological development, and medical application. All three of these loopholes exploit the notion of ‘absence’ or ‘failure’ in order to, one the one hand, challenge the scientific consensus, and on the other, foster new directions of research and innovation.

Rather than merely seeing these endeavours as attacks on science, they can thus also be understood as powerful reminders of ‘undone’ topics of research and unmet health needs as well as valuable stimuli for further research and innovation. As such, ‘making’ loopholes can be seen as healthy and indeed beneficial attempts at challenging taken-for-granted ways of knowing (and not knowing) that give further impetus to the democratisation of science.