3 ms·
I find that article full of red flags: - Conflating all radio-frequencies - Some of the cited articles specifically admit that the results are non-confirmed.
by dsign 7y ago
I find that article full of red flags:
- Conflating all radio-frequencies
- Some of the cited articles specifically admit that the results are non-confirmed.
- Multiple instances of going lax in "correlation is not causation", specially with bees and babies.
About the babies, oh I could go on a longer rant on that one. Yes they pay way too much attention to phones to the point where some mental faculties develop in a different way. But hey, when we lived in nomadic groups of people in the African flat-lands, the kids would always have more people and critters around to catch their attention, these days it is often just two busy adults in a sprawling all-consuming house with wages to earn, mortgages to pay and baby messes to fix. In my view, our "forced" social conventions, including Christian monogamy and asphyxiating rigid sexual and familial conventions have more to do with the problem than cell-phones.
Nonetheless, I acknowledge that in the "natural" world nature had more effective ways to kill us than even the Sun's ultraviolet radiation, so it's a brave new world out there once we make it after our 30s. So who knows, probably radio-frequencies are also out to get us.