More useless blah blah blah
Proceeds with actual useless blah blah blah....
where's the proof of injury to a human being injured by cellphone radiation
Right fucking there you sack of shit
In 1996, the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, adopted exposure guidelines that limited the intensity of exposure to radiofrequency radiation. These guidelines were designed to prevent significant heating of tissue from short-term exposure to radiofrequency radiation, not to protect us from the effects of long-term exposure to low levels of modulated, or pulsed, radiofrequency radiation, which is produced by cellphones, cordless phones and other wireless devices, including Wi-Fi.Yet, the preponderance of research published since 1990 finds adverse biologic and health effects from long-term exposure to radiofrequency radiation, including DNA damage.
More than 250 scientists, who have published over 2,000 papers and letters in professional journals on the biologic and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields produced by wireless devices, including cellphones, have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for health warnings and stronger exposure limits. So, there are many scientists who agree that this radiation is harmful to our health.
>You really are a ignorant fuck aren't you?
Projecting, much? Mister "I haz an opinion backed by myass!"
That's actually more the scientists getting silenced speaking here
You would know if you could read more than 2 paragraphs
Top Line Results
Radio frequency radiation:
91% (n=240) of 261 oxidative damage (or free radical) studies reported significant effects.
65% (n=226) of 348 genetic effects studies reported significant effects including: 65% (n=72) of 110 DNA comet assay studies reported significant effects. 73% (n=245) of 335 neurological studies reported significant effects.
Overall, 75% (n=711) of 944 radio frequency radiation studies reported significant biologic effects.
Extremely low frequency and static field electromagnetic fields:
89% (n=235) of 263 oxidative damage (or free radical) studies reported significant effects.
78% (n=160) of 204 genetic effects studies reported significant effects including: 73% (n=46) of 63 DNA comet assay studies reported significant effects. 91% (n=216) of 238 neurological studies reported significant effects.
Overall, 87% (n=611) of 705 extremely low frequency and static electromagnetic field studies reported significant biologic effects.
Overall, 80% (n=1,322) of 1,649 studies of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields reported significant effects.
Links to abstracts: https://bioinitiative.org/research-summaries/
(post is archived)