# Procon.org

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/procon-org/659440>\
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion\
**Created:** [May 27, 2013, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/procon-org/659440 "2013-05-27T01:59:09Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Reyemile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@Reyemile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reyemile)\
**Post date:** [May 27, 2013, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/procon-org/659440/1 "2013-05-27T01:59:09Z")

</div>

Anyone using these guys?

I work in education, and I’ve been instructed to base a passage for student essay responses on information from their page on [cell phones](http://cellphones.procon.org//). I’m having misgivings about doing so.

On the one hand, everything about them appears above the board. They are considered reliable by a variety of government agencies on issues like [medical marijuana](http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/), and report [thousands of schools](http://www.procon.org/about-us.php) using them as a reliable source for student research projects.

However, their cell-phone page seems a textbook example of [false balance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_balance). The American Cancer Institute roundly [rejects claims linking cell-phones to cancer](http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/cellphones)as lacking scientific support. But many of the claims of anti-cellphone advocated are repeated on [procon.org](http://procon.org) in what seems to be a textbook example of [“teaching the controversy”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach_the_Controversy). After all, if there weren’t a “con,” the “procon”.org couldn’t exist, right?

So what have people’s experience been with this website. Are they fair? Reliable? Accurate? Let me know!