Oops, meant include this reference *1 Mashevich M, Folkman D, Kesar A, et. al. Exposure of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to electromagnetic fields associated with cellular phones leads to chromosomal instability. Bioelectromagnetics. 2003;24:82–90.
On Thursday, November 5, 2020, Suresh Kalkunte <sskalku...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > ...I agree with Suresh that at this time, there > > is no scientific evidence that links RF with > > any kind of bodily harm. > > > Please note that there is scientific evidence to link chronic exposure to > RF result in chromosome instability*1, however there is no diagnostic test > to attribute a disease as the end state. > > > My point is that we should not dismiss the > > physician who thought that he may have > > found something, as some kind of > > conspiracist. > > > Thank you. I am your everyday engineer who has had to cope with > after-effects of powerful EMF and hence self-taught biology. If not for > medical experts (cancer biology in academia) express confidence in my > analysis connecting post-exposure to RF biology to likely disease outcome, > I know better than to make a fool of myself. As I have said before, this > group has the clue to dig for truth and not be satisfied with pseudo > concepts. > > Regards, > Suresh > > > On Thursday, November 5, 2020, Sabri Berisha <sa...@cluecentral.net> > wrote: > >> ----- On Nov 4, 2020, at 7:19 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> The fact that we haven't been able to identify a factual relationship, >> >> does not mean that there isn't any. >> > >> > just wow >> > >> > and, for all we know, the back side of the moon is green cheese >> >> I don't think you got the message buried within my message. True science >> is open to change, based on learning new facts. Like I said initially, I >> agree with Suresh that at this time, there is no scientific evidence that >> links RF with any kind of bodily harm. >> >> The parts that Tom cited, are very much relevant, and only reinforce the >> notion that at this time, we simply do not know enough. We do know, that >> at the low doses we generally receive, there is no evidence for harmful >> consequences. >> >> My point is that we should not dismiss the physician who thought that he >> may have found something, as some kind of conspiracist. That's not how >> scientific progress is achieved. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Sabri >> >> >>