5G madness in Japan

a reply to: muzzleflash

it's pretty obvious it's a thermal cause at this point.

No it isn't. The cause is indeterminate, just as it is with very many cancer cases.

You of all ppl here have to know that Im telling them the truth that radio waves are far less dangerous than visible light.

Making stuff up doesn't help.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: andy06shake

Radiation helped to save my life 38 years ago. Put my cancer into remission.

They used gamma radiation on your tumor.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: muzzleflash

it's pretty obvious it's a thermal cause at this point.

No it isn't. The cause is indeterminate, just as it is with very many cancer cases.

You of all ppl here have to know that Im telling them the truth that radio waves are far less dangerous than visible light.

Making stuff up doesn't help.

Omg do I have to do this to you again?

The studies exist. Maybe you didnt read them?

I didnt make it up I'm sharing valid information.

Why are you ignoring all the 5g hysteria and coming after my valid info debunking it?

a reply to: Phage

At this point Im the professor and you're a stubborn reluctant student.

Sigh....
I'll go find some links and give you, and everyone else the full course on EM radiation cancer and etc.

So frustrating lol...

a reply to: muzzleflash

There's another 5G thread running right now. Just as dumb.

a reply to: Phage

Cancer.org

They admit it's impossible RF can damage DNA.
Then admit Heat damage does occur.

So here's how it works.

1) We dunno how it causes cancer
2) It causes heat damage

So actually 1 is answered by #2.

Use your brain.
Answer this-
How can putting a cell phone to my ear cause a brain tumor yet Im safe not putting it there?
Do RF waves go thru my head even if the phone is 10 feet away? Yes they do huh so that cannot be the cause.

Prior to a few years ago cell phones got really hot if you talked on it over 20min. They aren't so bad these days tho as battery advancements etc mitigated that issue.

Will go find better links that ones a starter course.

a reply to: muzzleflash

1) We dunno how it causes cancer
2) It causes heat damage

So actually 1 is answered by #2.

No.

If RF radiation is absorbed by the body in large enough amounts, it can produce heat. This can lead to burns and body tissue damage.

Burns are not cancer. Tissue damage is not cancer.

But you said, in regard to the testicular cancer cases, this:

it's pretty obvious it's a thermal cause at this point.

A definitive statement which is not true. It is not possible to say the radar guns had anything to do with it at all.

a reply to: Phage

Phage come on man.

You need to learn the pattern.
I claim X, you freak out saying NO.

Then I crush ya.
Read Em and Weep Buddy

"Thermal Injury Causes DNA Damage and Lethality in Unheated Surrounding Cells: Active Thermal Bystander Effect"

Will go dig out the quotes.
One minute

a reply to: muzzleflash

Therefore, the thermal bystander effect appears to be an active process in which viable, heat-injured cells induce a signal cascade and/or mediator that damages or kills surrounding bystander cells.

Where is the part about causing cancer?

"Thermal injury is also known to potentiate tumor formation in animal models of radiation, ultraviolet and chemical carcinogenesis (Rylander et al., 2006)."

This is old info.

How come no one knows about it?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: muzzleflash

Therefore, the thermal bystander effect appears to be an active process in which viable, heat-injured cells induce a signal cascade and/or mediator that damages or kills surrounding bystander cells.

Where is the part about causing cancer?

There's several but I quoted a good source, Rylander. It's legit.

I worked with it in the 70's...I did attack radar on a FB111-F

you're right

how close and for how long with a cellphone against your ear....how it was determined for brain temp increase maybe....day one it was a chocolate bar in a pocket that alerted....back in the 30's maybe

a reply to: muzzleflash

a reply to: Phage

Do you require more info?
There's lots.

I got a few hours everyone here needs to see it anyways.

a reply to: GBP/JPY

Omg I'm so jealous lol.

The Aardvark is the coolest jet ever made and I wanna ride in one so bad!!!

Lucky you!

a reply to: muzzleflash

Here is Rylander et al., 2006.

It doesn't say anything about causing cancer, but it does say this:

Thermal therapy efficacy can be diminished due to heatshock protein
HSPinduction in regions of a tumor where tempera-tures are insufficient to coagulate proteins. HSP expression enhances tumor cell viability and imparts resistance to chemotherapy and ra-diation treatments, which are generally employed in conjunction withhyperthermia.

Rylander

So, treating tumors with thermal therapy can be problematic if not done properly.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
a reply to: Phage

Do you require more info?
There's lots.

I got a few hours everyone here needs to see it anyways.

Only if it says that thermal effects cause cancer or that it has anything thing to do with the cops in Ontario. You still haven't done either one.

How hot do you reckon the cops' nuts got? They didn't notice?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: muzzleflash

Here is Rylander et al., 2006.

It doesn't say anything about causing cancer, but it does say this:

Thermal therapy efficacy can be diminished due to heatshock protein
HSPinduction in regions of a tumor where tempera-tures are insufficient to coagulate proteins. HSP expression enhances tumor cell viability and imparts resistance to chemotherapy and ra-diation treatments, which are generally employed in conjunction withhyperthermia.

Rylander

So, treating tumors with thermal therapy can be problematic if not done properly.

You didn't even read it or understand it AND you challenged the other source quoting Rylander??

You got balls but Im afraid you just revealed your ignorance and lack of reading.

NIH says HSP causes cancer

And what was Rylanders paper saying? I'll tell you since you didn't read it - Thermal radiation induces HSPs and therefore causes tumors.

Read this new link and go back and actually read Rylanders report.

Which talks about what? Prostate cancer?
Very relevant to the topic.

a reply to: Phage

Do you pick me because Im your only challenge around here?

If so, thanks and carry on.
I accept my fate.

a reply to: muzzleflash

NIH says HSP causes cancer

The NIH doesn't say that, Stuart K. Calderwood does. And you modified the title of the article. Why?

It says that HSPs are a problem with existing cancers. Just like Rylander does. It does not say that thermal effects cause cancer.

Which talks about what? Prostate cancer?

Yes. About treating it with lasers.


How hot do you reckon the cops' nuts got?