Did you know that if you put raw meat on your counter top and turn you thermostat to 85 it will never cook no matter how long you expose it to that temperature?
It will certainly go rancid faster if you place it under an IR lamp than if you don't, and if somebody lies to you and sells you an IR bulb that is twice as hot as you intended, the tissue will degrade much faster than you anticipated when you said it won't cook. It may be that it will not burn, but it will still be damaged.
Did you know that persistent exposure to excess levels of various frequencies of non-ionizing radiation can damage the skin, leading to skin cancer?
Did you know that anything that damages cells in your body, increases the risk of cancer in those cells?
Are you saying this nonsense because in response to past articles about the dangers of heavy use of cell phones that exceed certain safe levels, you bleeted on and on about how it was unpossible and when you find out that the risks are real, and you were full of shit, it is very embarrassing?
"It will certainly go rancid faster if you place it under an IR lamp than if you don't, and if somebody lies to you and sells you an IR bulb that is twice as hot as you intended, the tissue will degrade much faster than you anticipated when you said it won't cook. It may be that it will not burn, but it will still be damaged."
That may be true but there is a slight problem with this analogy... food doesn't go rancid because meat is damaged by temperature, it goes rancid because heat accelerates the growth of
That was the point! There are multiple ways that high levels of non-ionizing radiation can damage you. Not only direct heat damage, but indirect heat damage (drying, etc), interference with signaling, etc.
There is a level that is believed safe, and levels above that are believed not to be safe, and this was above safe levels. That doesn't imply there is only one danger.
Refusing to learn about the dangers doesn't imply that there is little evidence. 20 years ago they found that rats had trouble remembering t
Still non-ionizing (Score:-1)
FUD...
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
Did you know that burns are not ionizing radiation?
Did you know that long term heating of tissues in your head can damage those tissues?
No, I didn't think you did.
Re: (Score:-1)
Re:Still non-ionizing (Score:1)
It will certainly go rancid faster if you place it under an IR lamp than if you don't, and if somebody lies to you and sells you an IR bulb that is twice as hot as you intended, the tissue will degrade much faster than you anticipated when you said it won't cook. It may be that it will not burn, but it will still be damaged.
Did you know that persistent exposure to excess levels of various frequencies of non-ionizing radiation can damage the skin, leading to skin cancer?
Did you know that anything that damages cells in your body, increases the risk of cancer in those cells?
Are you saying this nonsense because in response to past articles about the dangers of heavy use of cell phones that exceed certain safe levels, you bleeted on and on about how it was unpossible and when you find out that the risks are real, and you were full of shit, it is very embarrassing?
Re: (Score:3)
"It will certainly go rancid faster if you place it under an IR lamp than if you don't, and if somebody lies to you and sells you an IR bulb that is twice as hot as you intended, the tissue will degrade much faster than you anticipated when you said it won't cook. It may be that it will not burn, but it will still be damaged."
That may be true but there is a slight problem with this analogy... food doesn't go rancid because meat is damaged by temperature, it goes rancid because heat accelerates the growth of
Re: (Score:2)
That was the point! There are multiple ways that high levels of non-ionizing radiation can damage you. Not only direct heat damage, but indirect heat damage (drying, etc), interference with signaling, etc.
There is a level that is believed safe, and levels above that are believed not to be safe, and this was above safe levels. That doesn't imply there is only one danger.
Refusing to learn about the dangers doesn't imply that there is little evidence. 20 years ago they found that rats had trouble remembering t