It doesn't have to be ionizing radiation to trigger cellular changes.

Post #440,587 by crazy 12/18/21 9:15:01 AM 12/18/21 9:15:01 AM Reply	It doesn't have to be ionizing radiation to trigger cellular changes. We are sensitive in many areas to the energy. They just found out about photo receptors in our skin which then trigger all kinds of internal processes on exposure to light. We are sensitive to magnetic waves and can use them to orient ourselves. We thought it was just turtles and birds for many years but then realized mammals have it too, we are just not that aware of it. Sticking a radio transmitter up to your ear next to your brain on an ongoing basis is f****** insane. And if the bars are low that means it's upping its transmission power to speak to the tower far away. While the specific damage is next to impossible to predict I'd rather not take that chance. I take enough chances, this one's in unnecessary one.
Post #440,588 by Another Scott 12/18/21 10:26:24 AM 12/18/21 10:26:24 AM Reply	Changes =/= Disease. Don't move the goal posts. First it was brain cancer. Now bodies are sensitive to stuff. We're sensitive to changes in shadows. It probably evolved as a consequence of not getting eaten by big cats. That doesn't mean that vampire movies are dangerous. Life is too short to worry about nanoscopic-probability stuff. :-) The people making these claims about hazards of low-level RF/mm-wave radiation need to come up with a mechanism. It's chemistry and biology. It takes energy for things to change in a destructive way (atom displacement, etc.) in DNA and in cells - there isn't enough energy in cell-phone radiation to cause the effect that they're claiming. There are real dangers from cosmic rays - charged particles with monstrous energies (up to 10^+20 eV) - compared to 2.5 x 10^-6 eV for 6 GHz RF radiation in some 5G bands. HTH a little. Cheers, Scott.
Post #440,589 by crazy 12/18/21 10:45:32 AM 12/18/21 10:45:32 AM Reply	Accepted But it's perfectly reasonable to be worried about nano size stuff. Nano plastic and nano metal scare the s*** out of me. https://particleandfibretoxicology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12989-020-00358-y Not that I can do anything about it.
Post #440,590 by Another Scott 12/18/21 11:01:27 AM 12/18/21 11:01:27 AM Reply	Yup. Nothing you can do about it. Also... Currently, a systematic comparison of the neurotoxic effects of different particle types, shapes, sizes at different exposure concentrations and durations is lacking, but urgently needed to further elucidate the neurotoxic hazard and risk of exposure to micro- and nanoplastics. IOW, there's no evidence of a problem, but there might be a problem. I get it - society and technology are changing rapidly and we really don't know all the implications. But there are big problems now that we already know that are causing huge health and safety issues in the US - the pandemic; lead; maternal healthcare and abortion restrictions; climate change; etc. Yes, research the new stuff, but don't get distracted. Cheers, Scott.
Post #440,592 by pwhysall 12/19/21 4:05:08 AM 12/19/21 4:05:08 AM Reply	I just gave you the science If you're gonna reject it, there's not much more I can say to convince you.
Post #440,595 by crazy 12/20/21 7:59:04 AM 12/20/21 7:59:04 AM Reply	Yeah but you were an a**** at the moment. Another Scott is never an a****. I accepted the science from him. Don't worry, I still like you.

Welcome to IWETHEY!