Correct again Celtish.
Research in the UK has found that families living in close proximity to electricity pylons have more reported cases of Cancer than those who do not.
Also, interestingly, the divorce rate of couples who live near the said pylons is double that of folk who live in areas where there are no pylons.
So, I agree with you and feel it is something we should be concerned about.
Good question.
2007-12-13 04:23:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm neutral on this question, but must say that the conflicting answers have neither proven nor disproven anything. Thus I'm inclined to follow Tennyson's wise advice: "cleave ever to the sunnier side of doubt."
Your fears may contribute to stress, which can be as lethal as radiation. And even if your fears are justified, what would be an effective course of action? Hiding in the cellar perhaps? In brief, "Dont worry, be happy" seems a logical response. --Carlos
2007-12-13 11:29:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dear Carlos 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question a lot of people are calling for wi-fi to be banned in schools, colleges etc.. so there must be something dodgy about it.
edit: I watched a program about the reversal of the earths magnetic field and how it will allow more solar radiation to hit the earths surface and it is happening now. A mixture of that and mobile phones we are doomed.
2007-12-13 04:20:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by Johno 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes because the field strength of most of that radiation is extremely weak. In fact most is lower than the x-rays and gamma rays that pass through the earth from space and have done that for as long as there was an earth. I think you have a lot of irrational fears that you ould like to scare other into sharing.
2007-12-13 03:09:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rich Z 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
How do you know it isn’t harming us? Infertility is on the rise, autism is increasing, and other intangible effects are happening that no one has been able to prove a correlation between the two.
And to 50/50 to 50 – cancer rates are actually on the decline.
2007-12-13 04:10:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rainbow 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Those waves are just tooo large to "trigger illnesses" (via DNA mutation, the only way a wave can cause you any disease) by making DNA mutate. It is like getting sick from waves in the water, just too large to alter molecules. Now, Radioactive decay, that's another story.
2007-12-13 11:38:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by Optimus Prime 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
A weak cause and effect correlation.
When I get tired of some people preaching how much organic food is better for you. I reply "people have really been eating organic foods the past few years and cancer rates have increased" therefore show me proof that organic food is better for you.
See a weak cause and effect.
Edit: when I see aka "scientific studies", they are so weak. I do not know if I should blame the media or the scientist.
In the U.S., cancer rates have decreased marginally, but world wide it is increasing. I would assume better diagnostic testing would be the cause.
2007-12-13 03:59:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
YES!!!!! I CAN, and WILL, SERIOUSLY challenge the ridiculous notion that ALL electromagnetic radiation to which we are continually exposed is HARMFUL!!!!!
Is some of it harmful? YES! Is ALL of it harmful? NO!
Do microwaves and X-rays do us harm? YES!
Does lower frequency EMR harm us? NO!
Man has been exposed to electromagnetic radiation in the form of cosmic rays and solar radiation for as long as he has existed on earth. If nothing else, natural selection has eliminated those in our gene pool who were susceptible to EMR.
So, my friend, unless you can produce some objective, scientific data to support your claim, I just don't buy it.
2007-12-13 03:21:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Like kids who live under power lines, we're all gonna be riddled with cancer.
2007-12-13 03:08:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by mutterhals 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't think anyone heard you. They were all talking on their cell phones.
2007-12-13 03:07:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Rio Madeira 7
·
2⤊
0⤋