4 ms·
The commenters agree mainly on one thing: that the article is poorly researched because it only deals with cancer by direct ionization of DNA.
by limmeau 16y ago
The commenters agree mainly on one thing: that the article is poorly researched because it only deals with cancer by direct ionization of DNA.
- edge17 16y agoI'm not terribly literate in this field, so I'm curious what other ways you're referring to? I was taught that cancer's caused by transcription errors, which tend to increase with direct ionization of DNA.
- powrtoch 16y agoI think the point was that the article assumes that the only thing that can cause transcription errors is ionization. This assumption is known to be false, since viruses can also mess with DNA transcription. Obviously no one is suggesting that cell phones create viruses, but the point is that ruling out one avenue does not rule out the destination.
- sliverstorm 16y ago> Obviously no one is suggesting that cell phones create viruses It sure would be some kind of dystopian cracker's paradise though- imagine being able to use computer viruses to make people viruses that jump from their computers to living beings!
- bch 16y agoCosta Nostra. Who ordered a large with everything?
- limmeau 16y agoI'm not a biologist, either, but there are e.g. repair enzymes, which may denaturate and lose their function when heated. Reader "Richard2010", comment #2, named a few more mechanisms for causing cancer using non-ionizing radiation. Whether they are practical, I don't know.
- pasbesoin 16y agoNon-ionizing radiation can influence bonds and, as a result, chemical reactions. Bonds can be thought of as "vibrating", for example, and non-ionizing radiation can influence this behavior. Think of it, then, as a catalyst. Even where it is not directly effecting ionization, it may be accelerating chemical reactions that are adverse to an organism's well being. As an imagined example, what happens when you have a chlorine or other halide group in the vicinity? Perhaps a particular non-ionizing radiation environment increases the probability of their doing damage by chemical reaction. I've been away from what chemistry I did know for far too long, but even that bit led me to believe the "it's non-ionizing" arguments are, at best, incomplete.
- zzzeek 16y agoThe mechanism would involve existing cancer cells becoming activated - not the creation of new cancer cells via DNA mutation. Some background on studies about cancer cells that possibly exist within some or all of us already is in this NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/research/29cancer.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/research/29cancer.h... .