Was last week’s column about laptop computers getting damaged in-flight a belated April Fool’s joke?
Based on the responses I got, you might think so.
In the article, I noted that radiation levels were higher at cruising altitude, exposing passengers and crewmembers to possible harm. But the real trouble, I suggested, could be what radiation and electromagnetic interference does to a computer – specifically, to your data.
“Yes, I suppose it’s theoretically possible,” responded Kurt Gebauer. “However, I’ve flown over a million miles with a variety of computers, starting with an Osborne 1 in 1981. And never lost a single byte of data.”
Gebauer ought to know. As a veteran participant in computer and travel-related forums, he considers himself on the bleeding edge of portable computing. He says nobody can produce a credible first-person account of data loss and believes the story is just another “urban myth.”
Well, if it is, it wouldn’t be the first time this columnist has fallen for one. Remember the “magnets in the airline seats” story? Yep, I reported that one, too.
Dan del Sobral, a former nuclear submariner, wrote to tell me that the health risks of radiation were exaggerated. “I am very familiar with the radiation exposure we received while working and living in a nuclear-propelled ship. And yes, it was common knowledge that the radiation exposure received on planes was significant, and greater than we received on a nuclear sub,” he says.
“You need to be careful how you present this. In case you haven’t noticed, there is quite a bit of latent hysteria surrounding nuclear anything. You also need to be very careful about keeping your radiation straight. Ionizing radiation, from the sun or cosmic rays, is not the same thing an electromagnetic interference,” he pointed out.
Yikes, did I confuse the two?
“EMI and ionizing radiation are two different things,” clarified Roy Turner. “Read up on the two a little before the next article. You would do better to back up your hard drive every time you moved you laptop form one place to another because you are more likely to drop it and lose data then to have ionizing radiation cause loss of data.”
Others weren’t as nice about correcting me.
“Elliott obviously did not research his piece to understand the basic definitions and effects of the terms he used,” complained Steven Clark. “His piece is a muddled mess and technically flawed. EMI and ionizing radiation are two completely different forms of energy. The ionizing radiation found at high altitudes is a result of solar and cosmic processes. It is ionizing radiation that elevates high altitude radiation exposure levels, not EMI.”
Roy and Steven, truth be told, my science background isn’t the strongest. But I do know the difference between EMI and ionizing radiation and, after re-reading the first column, I agree with you. I could have been clearer in making the distinction.
Muddled as my prose may have been, I did get several e-mails from concerned travelers who wanted to know if their laptops could get “zapped.”
“Does the laptop or electronic device have to be turned on in-flight for it to be affected by radiation?” asked J. Alan Kendrick. “Additionally, is it safe to put my laptop on the X-ray belt when going through airport security?
The answer is no and yes. No, if radiation is going to affect your memory, it doesn’t matter if the device is off or on. Yes, it’s safe to put your laptop on the X-ray belt.
Vicky Newell of Alexandria, Va., e-mailed to say my column “struck a nerve” with her. “I am absolutely and completely dependent on my NEC MobilePro 800 and the thought of the variety of radiation that might affect it — airport security, EMI, the particles generated by solar flares and so on — makes me queasy. I’m considering putting it inside one of those lead-lined bags I use for my 35 mm film. Would that do any good?,” she asked.
Well, maybe. It would shield your portable from certain kinds of radiation. But I’m with Turner on this one. You’re more likely to lose data by dropping the computer.
OK. Did I leave anything out?
Yes, insists Chris Peraino. “You forgot to mention the effects of the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP),” he noted. “Put simply, the apparatus for HAARP is a reversal of a radio telescope: antennas send out signals instead of receiving. HAARP is the test run for a super-powerful radio-wave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto Earth and penetrate everything – living and dead.”
Peraino added that we’re supposed to be left with the impression that the HAARP is an academic project with the goal of changing the ionosphere to improve communications for our own good. “However, other US military documents put it more clearly: HAARP aims to learn how to ‘exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes.’”
“Don’t believe me?” he asks. “Then check this out.” He listed two URLs: http://www.xyz.net/~nohaarp/pandora.htm and http://www.primenet.com/~rfwatts/haarp/haarpgls.html
I don’t mind ending this column on an X-Files note, because even after all the responses to last week’s article (technically flawed as it may have been) I’m still convinced that there’s something up there at 36,000 feet that could affect your data.
Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.
Elliott is consumer advocate 
I'm on Facebook: Please "like" 
WHAT'S YOUR PROBLEM? If you're having trouble with a travel business - any business - and you've reached a dead end, maybe I can help. Send me an