Not An Expert In Waves, But Here Is My Opinion For $mac On The

• Not An Expert In Waves But Here Is My Opinion For $mac On The Internet

To start, let’s take a look at the claims this company makes. Here is part of the pitch they sent me: Wouldn’t you say that everyone knows that WiFi and cell phone signals are inescapable in our current environment? Doesn’t matter if we’re awake, sleeping, exercising, relaxing, we are constantly surrounded by invisible, harmful waves of EMF radiation. Every time I see someone in front of their computers, and they’re texting someone, while their smartwatch is sending alerts and they have earbuds in, I always think to myself, wow, they might as well be glowing!

Electro-stress is everywhere and rears its head in the form of headaches, tiredness, anxiety – each DOT is programmed with a powerful resonant energy signature which retunes energy interference. This myth isn’t a new one. I don’t know who started it and when, but I’ve been hearing it for at least a decade. In this editorial, I’ll be using the term instead of Wi-Fi or cellular signals. Both are included in this type of radiation. I know the pitch doesn’t specifically mention cancer, just electro-stress (whatever that is), but it’s part of the same nonsense belief. SmartDOT, one of many products sold by this company Radiation Not Causing Cancer HowStuffWorks, which cites credible sources like the American Cancer Society, there have been two types of studies that look at RF radiation: Ones that observe human cancer rates and others involving lab animals.

Sleeping, exercising, relaxing, we are constantly surrounded by invisible, harmful waves of EMF radiation. The Mac Observer's Videos.

The human studies haven’t found a link between increased cancer rates and people who are around a lot of RF radiation. In the animal lab studies, no link between cancer and RF radiation has been found.

However, some studies have observed “trace biological changes” that could be hypothetically linked to cancer. Translation: A scientist found an interesting data point but it isn’t serious enough to say anything other than “hypothetically.” The electromagnetic spectrum RF radiation like Wi-Fi, cellular, and Bluetooth are classified as low-frequency, non-ionizing radiation. This means they aren’t powerful enough to charge molecules (Remember that an is an electrically-charged atom or molecule) and can’t damage your body at the cellular level.

On the electromagnetic spectrum, Wi-Fi operates in the 2GHz to 5GHz range, making them (Microwaves being a sub-class of radio waves). Microwaves have lower energy than visible light. Products like energydots don’t mention visible light, but according to their logic, if Wi-Fi is harmful, visible light should be more harmful just by being more energetic. But no one worries about getting cancer from visible light. Now, we do worry about UV radiation, but although visible light and UV rays come from the same source (the sun), the visible part of it isn’t the cancer-causing part. Radiation Causing Cancer Only a small portion of the electromagnetic spectrum actually can cause cancer.

Harmful includes,. Sources of UV radiation include stars, mercury-vapor lamps, tanning lamps, and black lights. Sources of X-rays include lightning bolts, x-ray tubes, certain stars, black holes, and the moon.

Not An Expert In Waves But Here Is My Opinion For $mac On The Internet

Sources of gamma rays include nuclear explosions and nuclear reactors, solar flares, cosmic rays, and a bunch of other non-terrestrial sources. As you can see, you have to be in contact with specific, powerful devices and objects to get harmful radiation. And to be fair, you wouldn’t be able to tell either, because our senses can’t tell the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. But with enough exposure you’ll notice side effects like radiation burns, radiation sickness, and death (A hell of a side effect!) Conclusion People are certainly welcome to buy products like energydots, but I urge everyone to be skeptical of claims such as what I was emailed. And we can also apply that in the opposite direction: Just because such-and-such scientific study says something, that doesn’t automatically make it true.

Studies undergo an intensive that determines their veracity. Thanks to our recent presidential election, we’re all becoming more aware of “fake news” and “alternative facts.” As we head into 2019 more skepticism should be a resolution. Nothing against Andrew since I really like a lot of his stories and the ones he links to but I have to agree with John Kheit that I too disagree with this. The amount of women who have put their cellphones (these are not even smart phones which are worse) in their bras and then have cancer the exact shape and size of their phone in their breast, says a lot. I’ve known personal stories of that and it didn’t take years either.

Sorry but with all the info I know and have researched myself about the health hazards and Read more ». I disagree with this. Not that WiFi or current cell phones are unsafe, but there is no such thing as a type of radiation being “safe”. Radiation is all about intensity and duration of exposure. There is a reason why folks working on microwave transceivers dress like shown in this article: FYI radar uses microwaves too.

So it all boils down to duration and intensity of exposure. If you doubt this, please trick your microwave close door sensor, put your head in there, and turn it on for a few minutes and see how that works out for you Read more ». I am thinking in particular the movie THEM. Atomic bomb tests created some huge ants that kill people: Robert Graham: Pat, if these monsters got started as a result of the first atomic bomb in 1945, what about all the others that have been exploded since then? Patricia ‘Pat’ Medford: I don’t know. Harold Medford: Nobody knows, Robert.

When Man entered the atomic age, he opened a door into a new world. What we’ll eventually find in that new world, nobody can predict.

We may be witnesses to a Biblical prophecy come true – ‘And there shall be Read more ». Andrew: Great PSA; a clean, simple but thorough treatment. A variant of this belief has been around for decades. Perhaps not surprisingly, this is not the first time that this topic has featured on TMO.

Of course, as you’ve indicated, it’s a topic that continues to circulate amongst an otherwise literate population worldwide; a zombified topic that simply won’t die despite numerous peer reviewed studies and authoritative statements to the public. If fortune smiles, may it not resurface until next Halloween, when we’re all in the mood for a fictitious fright.