Beautifully written. These are the same psycho paths who instead of building community and learning to work together in a future that is burning, would rather hoard food and ammo and try to hold out longer than anyone else. I’d rather live my last days working together with beautiful people than locking myself indoors alone.
i agree with your overall point, but the second search result was actually correct; Wi-Fi uses radio waves(lower frequency than visible light), which aren’t able to damage dna like UV radiation , x-rays, and gamma rays(so can’t cause cancer). That said, it is absolutely true that capitalism and the state expose people to harmful levels of radiation and lie about it. Just take the US’s nuclear testing, the story of the radium girls, and how uranium mining harms the Navajo nation
You're correct that radio and other lower frequency waves are not ionizing radiation (which x-rays are), which are proven to directly damage DNA. However, you're incorrect in assuming that this means that high and daily doses of the radiation emitted by cell towers, wi-fi routers, and the like are safe. It is still being researched and there is still no scientific consensus (with telecommunications industries throwing a HUGE amount of money at scientists to prevent any consensus), but there is already substantial peer-reviewed evidence of a *correlation* with cancer and other health problems.
We shouldn't assume that means the one definitely causes or contributes to the other, but it would be even more unjustifiable to trust the industry and assume that there isn't.
Please try to do more careful reads in the future before 'splaining and spreading information that may not be well founded, especially if it's something so sensitive, like regarding people's health and survival.
Just realized something else; if “wi-fi doesn’t cause cancer” is the second result of the search query “do environmental factors cause brain cancer”, it means it might be trying to discredit the second question by talking about one non-carcinogenic environmental factor, ignoring the many which do increase cancer risk. Maybe not “trying to discredit” as in actual intent, but that it benefits people who don’t want you to care about environmental causes of cancer
Beautifully written. These are the same psycho paths who instead of building community and learning to work together in a future that is burning, would rather hoard food and ammo and try to hold out longer than anyone else. I’d rather live my last days working together with beautiful people than locking myself indoors alone.
i agree with your overall point, but the second search result was actually correct; Wi-Fi uses radio waves(lower frequency than visible light), which aren’t able to damage dna like UV radiation , x-rays, and gamma rays(so can’t cause cancer). That said, it is absolutely true that capitalism and the state expose people to harmful levels of radiation and lie about it. Just take the US’s nuclear testing, the story of the radium girls, and how uranium mining harms the Navajo nation
You're correct that radio and other lower frequency waves are not ionizing radiation (which x-rays are), which are proven to directly damage DNA. However, you're incorrect in assuming that this means that high and daily doses of the radiation emitted by cell towers, wi-fi routers, and the like are safe. It is still being researched and there is still no scientific consensus (with telecommunications industries throwing a HUGE amount of money at scientists to prevent any consensus), but there is already substantial peer-reviewed evidence of a *correlation* with cancer and other health problems.
We shouldn't assume that means the one definitely causes or contributes to the other, but it would be even more unjustifiable to trust the industry and assume that there isn't.
Please try to do more careful reads in the future before 'splaining and spreading information that may not be well founded, especially if it's something so sensitive, like regarding people's health and survival.
all the best!
p
Just realized something else; if “wi-fi doesn’t cause cancer” is the second result of the search query “do environmental factors cause brain cancer”, it means it might be trying to discredit the second question by talking about one non-carcinogenic environmental factor, ignoring the many which do increase cancer risk. Maybe not “trying to discredit” as in actual intent, but that it benefits people who don’t want you to care about environmental causes of cancer