Instead of simply looking down on and being mean to those people, wouldn't it be better to give them a "test for WiFi allergy", wherein wifi is randomly enabled or shut off and they have to indicate how they're feeling?
It has already been established that any physiological impact from consumer electronics EM radiation is extremely unlikely. Interest groups decline offers to "prove" affliction because they have experienced that it won't give the results they want, instead it consistently proves that *actual EM radiation* has nothing to do with any reaction the subjects may have.
As with other phobias the impact to health and well-being is likely very real, excluding the attention seekers. "Being mean" and condescending to afflicted people is not constructive. While many of them might be more gullible than the average population for being taken in in the first place, rationality nonetheless stops once real phobia sets in.
I fully believe that anxiety and more severe negative impacts are very real for a lot of those who think they are afflicted. I also believe that it would be better for everyone to recognise this as a psychological issue rather than a physiological one. These people have *real* problems for imagined reasons.
Apart from everything else the "awareness drives" are bad; causing unnecessary anxiety and inconvenience for a lot of people that "don't know anything about technology, but better safe than sorry, right?". Not to mention the people around them who are inconvenienced to a lesser or greater degree by having to accommodate the "afflicted" ones.