On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 07:47:52 -0700 (PDT), klem kedidelhopper
wrote:
I was speaking to a friend the other day about microwave cooking and
he told me that he was under the impression that during microwave
heating of food the molecular structure is changed to a state which
may be either carcinogenic or somehow otherwise unhealthful for human
consumption.
It's fairly easy to prove that something is dangerous and unhealthy.
It's almost impossible to prove that something is *NOT* dangerous and
unhealthy. For example, walking down the road is potentially
dangerous because you might stumble and fall. Plenty of slip and fall
statistics are available to demonstrate the point. However, just try
to prove that walking down the road is perfectly safe. You can't
because someone will invariably suggest that this exposes you to
various things falling from the sky, sunburn, and automobile attack.
There's ALWAYS a way to make something unsafe, thus making it
impossible to prove that anything is really *NOT* dangerous and
unhealthy.
You might also notice that food safety is a question of degree.
Drinking water is safe in reasonable quantity, but drinking too much
water is potentially a problem. Same with many foods. Well, that
also applies to microwave, barbeque, or nuclear cooking. All of these
are safe in small quantities, but if you microwave everything you eat,
you're going to have a problem.
I understand that molecules are vibrated during microwave
exposure and I think that I've heard that if you heat something until
it is a hard unrecognizable crunchy lump then maybe that could be
true. But for general reheating of food or beverages is there a
concern?
That's not a very good description of how a microwave oven works. I'm
lazy and don't want to get into that. Suffice to say that you will
get the same hard unrecognizable crunchy lump no matter what method
you use to heat the food.
I will never trust manufacturers who's agendas are purely financially
driven to tell me the truth
I have the same problem with online medicine. The hype is everywhere.
My method is similar to yours. If those offering the advice have a
financial or political agenda, I ignore it. That means that medical
advice from someone selling a procedure, pill, treatment, or religion,
is probably biased in some way. The problem is that this doesn't
leave much in the way of proper research. Do you trust universities
and institutes to get it right when they are funded by the same
manufacturers and groups that have a vested interest in producing
their favorite result? All that's left is the government, which
usually outsources their studies to the same universities and
institutes. That essentially leave nobody worth trusting.
and I still don't believe that irradiating
oneself with a blue tooth headset for hours on end or even using a
cell phone for that matter can ever be in the least bit
healthful...Lenny
Well, please look at this graph:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/brain-CNS-cancer.jpg
It's the incidence of new brain and central nervous system cancers
between 1975 and 2006 taken in 5 metro areas. Note that it's almost
flat. During the same time period, the use of cell phones, BlueGoof
headsets, and wireless devices have increased quite dramatically. One
would expect to see a rise in the incidence of brain and CNS cancers
if the stories are to be believed. Interestingly, I see a decrease in
the incidence over most of the time period (mostly caused by improved
early diagnosis through PET scans).
As before, it's impossible to prove the Bluetooth, cellular, Wi-Fi,
and other forms for personal irradiation are safe. It's easy enough
to prove that they're not safe, but somehow, the statistics don't seem
to follow.
Incidentally, age has a big effect in braind and CNS cancers. See:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/brain-CNS-cancer-by-age-1992-2006.jpg
which is the incidence of brain and CNS cancers from 1992 to 2006 by
age. Note that the overwhelming number of cancers are in older people
starting at about age 59. Interestingly, it's the younger age group
that spends all day yacking on the cell phone. If RF caused cancer,
one would expect it to show a much higher incidence rate among the
heavy users.
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
#
http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS