 |
The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!
'Unexplained reasons' for cancer? C'mon man...
Whitehouse team wants you to know:
The report, available at pcp.cancer.gov, offered some of its own advice to consumers.
For instance, the report said that although large studies have found no links between cell phone use and cancer, people would be prudent to wear headsets and make calls quickly.
The report delighted environmental groups that have been pressing for more regulation of chemicals. "It is very gratifying to see this remarkable report that addresses those concerns," said Julia Brody, executive director of the Silent Spring Institute.
"The 40-year war on cancer has been called for what it is ... a failure," Jeanne Rizzo, president and chief executive of the Breast Cancer Fund, which advocates about links between chemicals and breast cancer, told reporters in a telephone briefing.
New Jersey Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg said he hoped the report would help boost support for a bill requiring closer regulation of chemicals.
"My Safe Chemicals Act will require testing of all chemicals, and take substances off the market if the manufacturer cannot prove they are safe," he said.
~
I wonder if they mention cancers caused by the eight years before Obama?
The report, available at pcp.cancer.gov, offered some of its own advice to consumers.
For instance, the report said that although large studies have found no links between cell phone use and cancer, people would be prudent to wear headsets and make calls quickly.
The report delighted environmental groups that have been pressing for more regulation of chemicals. "It is very gratifying to see this remarkable report that addresses those concerns," said Julia Brody, executive director of the Silent Spring Institute.
"The 40-year war on cancer has been called for what it is ... a failure," Jeanne Rizzo, president and chief executive of the Breast Cancer Fund, which advocates about links between chemicals and breast cancer, told reporters in a telephone briefing.
New Jersey Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg said he hoped the report would help boost support for a bill requiring closer regulation of chemicals.
"My Safe Chemicals Act will require testing of all chemicals, and take substances off the market if the manufacturer cannot prove they are safe," he said.
~
I wonder if they mention cancers caused by the eight years before Obama?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Фелч Гроган on -
Nice post. But could you do folks a favour and try to make sense ? Just a little thing, not much. I'm not all that familiar with cell phone chemicals, but obviously they're A DANGER EVERYONE MUST BE MADE AWARE OF.
-
Permalink Reply by Johnsky on -
Yeah, I think he missed a bridge between topics there... or, maybe the source is just as confusing.
From what I have studied of others research of Cancer tumors, a few things have to be present in order to begin the process. Dead or dying cells neighboring living cells, and a bacteria/fungi/etc that is capable of damaging the protective coating of DNA... which in turn incidentally attacks the living cells DNA coating due to their proximity to the dead cells they naturally digest/destroy. From there it's a matter of bad copies reproduced at an alarming rate.
Cell phones can only have one potential link to the process. Killing cells whilst still attached to living cells. (And this is only if we can prove that radio waves from cell phones can harm living cells). Unfortunately for the anti-cellphone crowd, dead cells are hardly anything un-natural. More cells die naturally in you per day than I can fathom.
(Oh, before you ask, the radiation emitted from cell phones is entirely the wrong area of the spectrum or magnitude to harm DNA directly.)
Smoking both kills cells via suffocation from tar coating, and incidentally delivers a mass quantity of a form of fungal spores that is known to damage neighboring cells DNA. Which is why smoking is known to increase your chances of a cancer tumor developing.
Colon cancer is a common one due to the extreme abundance of bacteria in and around a damaged colon wall. They tear down the dead cells, accidentally damage a neighboring healthy cells blueprint... and, if the odds are against you, the cell reproduces again, poorly.
Does this mean kill the bacteria = stop cancer? Nope. The DNA damaging elements are everywhere, and I do mean everywhere. Mostly, they are what naturally decays dead organics, or at least what other species don't get to digest first.
Does this give us any clue as to how to stop cancer once it starts? Nope again. This is just the trigger... unfortunately, the trigger is about as common as life itself. There's no eliminating it.
(At least, this is the current working theory I'm aware of)
But back to the topic of cell phones?
Hardly.
Cell phones wont increase your risk of cancer any more than a cut, bruise, or burn. Why? Because you're missing one ingredient... something foreign to try to digest/destroy the dead cells.
lol. And I'm no expert on this, just an electro-mechanical engineering technician, but I'm quite sure radio-waves aren't capable of carrying or delivering organic materials nor chemicals. lol.
-
Permalink Reply by Andrew on -
Ok, the posts by Felch and Johnsky are worth a press of the applause button or better stated, Thank you for your art and grace of textual elocution. Wait...did I just hear a fungal radio wave whisper something to my DNA?
-
Permalink Reply by SecularCortex13.x on -
"bridge between topics"
the mother of all bridges! where's that confounded bridge!
-
Permalink Reply by SecularCortex13.x on
-
whoa, crazed!
-
Permalink Reply by Mick Wright on -
Man, that guy's house sounds tempting to troll - with a shaven head and five cellphones on various armatures around the shining bonce. I'd add a big bottle labeled CHEMICALS to the scene but that'd be the clincher that got the troll arrested.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Latest Activity
© 2013 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
