6 ms·

People have the right to be wary of inventions like GMO and 5G. Burk & Braun used to produce Radium Schokolade, Hippman-Blach bakery - Radium Bread. Dr. Alfred

by b0rsuk 6y ago

People have the right to be wary of inventions like GMO and 5G. Burk & Braun used to produce Radium Schokolade, Hippman-Blach bakery - Radium Bread. Dr. Alfred Curie (not related) used to sell toothpaste with radium+thorium. Impotence treatments for men contained the element (inventor died of bladder cancer). Ancient Romans loved lead, not just for water pipes but for cups and vats they used to boil defrutum, a very popular syrup added to wine. Westerners love chairs and shoes. I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel now, but Americans use feet and inches ;-).

gambiting 6y ago
I honestly don't know if that's comparable. Romans didn't have any way to know the dangers of lead. Early 20th century people had very limited knowledge on radioactivity. Now you can read up about non-ionizing radiation as much as you like, for free, and discover that despite hundreds of studies done on it non-ionizing radiation does not cause cancer. Not to mention that the frequencies used by 5G have been used by other things for years and clearly never caused much controversy. Same about GMO - you can read up on it and educate yourself, you can discover real things you should be upset about(like GMO crops which can resist glycophosphates so that farmers can use roundup to dessicate plants before harvest - the problem isn't the plants, the problem is the farming practice). So sure, we have the right to be wary - but that right should be followed by research, not by indulging in conspiracy theories about Billy Gates trying to control everyone with vaccines. That's just dumb.
- high_density 6y ago
  I think GP is saying our scientific knowledge might not be 100% perfect, and we might not know one or two things until later. You're a bit over-reacting -- you just made GP an anti-vaccer... maybe pointing out that we have better research tools and methodologies will do...
  - gambiting 6y ago
    >>You're a bit over-reacting -- you just made GP an anti-vaccer. Oh god, that was not my intention in the slightest. All I wanted to say was that right now we have access to an immense amount of knowledge we can use to help ourselves make decisions, unlike Romans or even just people 100 years ago.
    - high_density 6y ago
      > Oh god, that was not my intention in the slightest yes I can see that. but GP didn't actually say "5G is deadly", but "there might be something we don't know that can turn out to be harmful" > we have access to an immense amount of knowledge we can use to help ourselves make decisions the older-generations in the examples by GP could have been thinking the same thing. we all know better than older-gens, and future-gens will probably know better than us Anyway, just don't try to attacking too soon -- might hinder discussion / research-attempts / etc
- thatguy0900 6y ago
  Roman's did know that lead was bad for you. Asbestos, for that matter, too. They might not have known the specifics, but it was documented that slaves who worked in asbestos mines always had lung issues.
- b0rsuk 6y ago
  Except they did have. Romans and antique people in general were smarter than you give them credit for. When they were about to set up a city, they would look for local villages and check how many long lived people there were. If people were not living into their 80's and 90's, they would conclude the water (or something else) in the location is unhealthy and look for another place. They didn't have to know the exact reason, just that the place was unhealthy. There was a similar article on HN recently, I think it was about ancient hospital in Turkey. A ruler determined preferable location by hanging meat around the city and seeing where it rots the slowest. I didn't bring up vaccines because they are used to prevent infectious diseases. Taking a vaccine or not is not only your business, because it affects people around you. They also use methods like horseshoe crab blood for testing and it convinces me. I don't know where you live but around here food industry is chock full of additives, preservatives, and 'flavors identical to natural'. Food industry and chemistry can be used to do good, but often they're just used for greed. It's a constant arms race between consumer rights groups, testing various substances, and food industry coming up with a new one that hasn't been proven harmful _yet_. There are documentary movies like All That Sugar. Also, I know it's nasty but in some European countries we call sizes beyond XXL "American Size". American food is especially heavily processed. It used to be that only the rich were fat, now it's the opposite. The poor can't afford healthy food. GMO is making changes in spaghetti code, except genetic labs are much more expensive than chemical labs. See above. Why would they use them to make food healthier when they can make it tastier and cheaper to make? More sales, bigger profits. Do you think they have unit tests and regression tests for genome? Look how much trouble there is with Roundup, pesticides and herbicides. Consider plastics. There's an ungodly amount of propaganda and entire industry set up on systematic lies. Best case scenario for recycling plastics is 30% return, after careful segregation (there are over 100 varieties). Most of it ends up in landfills in Asia or Africa instead. Even if you do get some recycled plastic, it's of worse quality. The public has been manipulated into thinking recycling plastics helps a great deal. Coca Cola is one of the biggest polluters in the world, and it's actively sponsoring recycling efforts because it SHIFTS THE BLAME. Everyone bringing up plastic pollution has been ridiculed for DECADES. Consider omnipresent sugar, and the campaign to demonize fats in food. Consider cholesterol or butter. And you're telling me I should just jump at 5G with only a few years of studies? I don't need 5G, autonomous auto industry needs it. I'll gladly be called a lunatic, idiot, paranoid and worse for being skeptical, patient and cautious.
miked85 6y ago
> Westerners love chairs and shoes I am missing the reference here, how do chairs and shoes compare to radium and lead?
- b0rsuk 6y ago
  They cause health problems on the level comparable to smoking or bad sleep.
  - np_tedious 6y ago
    Chairs and shoes cause health problems? Can you tell me more? I get that sitting an excessive amount of the day, or wearing shoes for all your waking hours, can be bad. Is that all you mean or is there something more?
    - b0rsuk 6y ago
      Basically wearing shoes puts more stress on your knee and skeletal system. More feet and knee problems over time. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/going-barefoot-is-good-for-the-sole/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/going-barefoot-is... The biomechanical differences between barefoot and shod distance running: a systematic review and preliminary meta-analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23996137/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23996137/ Studies show being barefoot makes you smarter! https://www.yourmodernfamily.com/barefoot-kids/ https://www.yourmodernfamily.com/barefoot-kids/ https://breakingmuscle.com/fitness/the-pros-and-cons-of-barefoot-running-what-the-research-says https://breakingmuscle.com/fitness/the-pros-and-cons-of-bare... As for sitting, there are countless studies showing it's bad for health, posture, even causing hemorrhoids. Just search for 'sitting harmful'. There's a lot more consensus on this than barefoot vs shod.
      - KozmoNau7 6y ago
        Reading the sources, it would be more correct to say that overly cushioned shoes are the problem, not all shoes. For running, you have to unlearn the heel strike type of stride that most people adopt when they use cushioned running shoes. You need to roll your feet as you land, just as if you were running barefoot. I don't run much, but for walking I've preferred solid soles made from high durometer rubber for a while now, because they beat up my feet a lot less than a pair of cushioned sneakers for long walks, and it's a lot better than going barefoot in -5C weather :-) My dad wore clogs for most of his working life. Not the old-fashioned carved wooden ones, but the type with leather uppers and a glued on anti-slip layer of rubber on thick wooden soles. He said they were the most comfortable working shoes for varied surfaces and uneven ground.
type0 6y ago
Personally I think uranium glassware looks very cool, you wouldn't want to shatter it or eat or drink from it, but it sure looks amazing.
bawolff 6y ago
> Ancient Romans loved lead, not just for water pipes but for cups and vats they used to boil defrutum, a very popular syrup added to wine. Ancient romans were also aware it was bad for you (Vitruvius wrote about it in first century BC) Similarly with radium, i dont know about your specific examples but many of the egregious unsafe commercial radiation things happened after scientists knew the dangers. That's very different than 5g and GMOs where there is basically no evidence of risk despite much study.
- NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
  Regarding 5G I thought the same but according to Sabine it is not quite clear it is safe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBsP-bmDLOo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBsP-bmDLOo [14:00] "Now the thing is if you look what is known about the health risks from long-term exposure to the new millimeter waves band, there are basically no studies. "
  - jiggawatts 6y ago
    There have been studies, just not many. It's hard to get funding to study something where there isn't a theoretically plausible mechanism for damage, and where the few experiments to "double check" found nothing, as expected. Millimeter waves aren't "new" either. The "new" part is using mm waves for data. For decades now there have been tons of applications for mm wave radiation, and often at much higher power levels. All sorts of satellite communications, radar, etc... This isn't a situation where some scientist discovers an entirely new mechanism as says "wow, this funny radiation that makes things glow in the dark might have some practical application". Instead, it's just a matter of VLSI digital radio circuitry finally reaching the point where we can utilise a very familiar part of the spectrum for high bandwidth data. Most of the anti-5G commentary is by uneducated Facebook moms "just asking questions" and "worried about their kids". If you want to reduce your personal risk from mobile phones, don't text and drive.
    - NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
      I hear you, but this is a type of thing that creates opinion division and additional paranoia. Sabina is physicist, and I do not know your credentials, I would need to conclude behind logic and little and no actual references you have provided. You may say, "you should do the research", but we do not time to research every little thing. So, I would go with a motion that for "5G we do not know". Why? I lived in a place where people believed, or had very serious fear from the draft (light indoor "wind") and that it causes all kind of illnesses. Then, around mid of my life, all kind of jokes were made on that subject. But, using logically I concluded despite jokes that there can be some issues, as in sedentary life, outside tissue if it gets cooled, blood vessels will shrink causing the poor supply of oxygen and nutrients, during a prolonged time that can cause some serious "buildup" and issues. Now, later on, that logic was confirmed by studies and western science. Jokes were still there, and older people still have (now) justifiable fear, but non of two groups knows about the study. It is not hard to say "I do not know", and you and I, we do not. Humans as a whole do not know much, we do not know does microwave with smallest quantities impact metabolic intake of let say vitamins, we do not know does some of the minerals has a resonant frequency that will prevent mineral being absorbed in the cells, we do not know it is there some kind of impact on skin cells or hair follicles, will any of the tissue behave as an antenna, we do not know much. Yes, it looks semi-logical that it is low-level energy and it can be stopped by a thin wall, but a wall is not live and does not care. Our bodies are complex mechanism, still, in 21st century we are trying do neurosurgery with stone-age axes. And each period of history, we do the same, when we do not know something, we use humans Guinea pigs, and when things go wrong, then we try to fix issues. Each time is on a larger scale and each time is a more serious issue. Asbestos, forever chemicals (PFAS, PFOS and PFOA), endocrine disruptors, oil industry, plastic, leaded petrol, chlorine in the water ... and always the same pattern, there is an excess of something, there is "bright" idea, big money of course, and always do before the study, because at that time we find it "necessary". So, we convince the public that it is necessary, and they must follow... And above all, dynamic of many human conversations is driven by "trying to be right" instead doing actual scientific study and action on facts. One thing I agree 100% texting and driving does kill.
delusional 6y ago
They have the right to be wary of whatever they like, but they don't get to dictate public policy or be taken seriously unless they do the research, and research is not searching on google. Doubting the safety of a material should lead you to devise experiments that prove your doubts. It should not be taken as truth or acted on as doubts. If you are too lazy or incompetent to do the experiments yourself, you don't get to be listened to as a serious contributor.
- b0rsuk 6y ago
  Ancient Romans, asbestos and radioactive material users probably also thought they did research.

by b0rsuk 6y ago

gambiting 6y ago

I honestly don't know if that's comparable. Romans didn't have any way to know the dangers of lead. Early 20th century people had very limited knowledge on radioactivity. Now you can read up about non-ionizing radiation as much as you like, for free, and discover that despite hundreds of studies done on it non-ionizing radiation does not cause cancer. Not to mention that the frequencies used by 5G have been used by other things for years and clearly never caused much controversy. Same about GMO - you can read up on it and educate yourself, you can discover real things you should be upset about(like GMO crops which can resist glycophosphates so that farmers can use roundup to dessicate plants before harvest - the problem isn't the plants, the problem is the farming practice). So sure, we have the right to be wary - but that right should be followed by research, not by indulging in conspiracy theories about Billy Gates trying to control everyone with vaccines. That's just dumb.

high_density 6y ago
I think GP is saying our scientific knowledge might not be 100% perfect, and we might not know one or two things until later. You're a bit over-reacting -- you just made GP an anti-vaccer... maybe pointing out that we have better research tools and methodologies will do...
- gambiting 6y ago
  >>You're a bit over-reacting -- you just made GP an anti-vaccer. Oh god, that was not my intention in the slightest. All I wanted to say was that right now we have access to an immense amount of knowledge we can use to help ourselves make decisions, unlike Romans or even just people 100 years ago.
  - high_density 6y ago
    > Oh god, that was not my intention in the slightest yes I can see that. but GP didn't actually say "5G is deadly", but "there might be something we don't know that can turn out to be harmful" > we have access to an immense amount of knowledge we can use to help ourselves make decisions the older-generations in the examples by GP could have been thinking the same thing. we all know better than older-gens, and future-gens will probably know better than us Anyway, just don't try to attacking too soon -- might hinder discussion / research-attempts / etc
thatguy0900 6y ago
Roman's did know that lead was bad for you. Asbestos, for that matter, too. They might not have known the specifics, but it was documented that slaves who worked in asbestos mines always had lung issues.
b0rsuk 6y ago
Except they did have. Romans and antique people in general were smarter than you give them credit for. When they were about to set up a city, they would look for local villages and check how many long lived people there were. If people were not living into their 80's and 90's, they would conclude the water (or something else) in the location is unhealthy and look for another place. They didn't have to know the exact reason, just that the place was unhealthy. There was a similar article on HN recently, I think it was about ancient hospital in Turkey. A ruler determined preferable location by hanging meat around the city and seeing where it rots the slowest. I didn't bring up vaccines because they are used to prevent infectious diseases. Taking a vaccine or not is not only your business, because it affects people around you. They also use methods like horseshoe crab blood for testing and it convinces me. I don't know where you live but around here food industry is chock full of additives, preservatives, and 'flavors identical to natural'. Food industry and chemistry can be used to do good, but often they're just used for greed. It's a constant arms race between consumer rights groups, testing various substances, and food industry coming up with a new one that hasn't been proven harmful _yet_. There are documentary movies like All That Sugar. Also, I know it's nasty but in some European countries we call sizes beyond XXL "American Size". American food is especially heavily processed. It used to be that only the rich were fat, now it's the opposite. The poor can't afford healthy food. GMO is making changes in spaghetti code, except genetic labs are much more expensive than chemical labs. See above. Why would they use them to make food healthier when they can make it tastier and cheaper to make? More sales, bigger profits. Do you think they have unit tests and regression tests for genome? Look how much trouble there is with Roundup, pesticides and herbicides. Consider plastics. There's an ungodly amount of propaganda and entire industry set up on systematic lies. Best case scenario for recycling plastics is 30% return, after careful segregation (there are over 100 varieties). Most of it ends up in landfills in Asia or Africa instead. Even if you do get some recycled plastic, it's of worse quality. The public has been manipulated into thinking recycling plastics helps a great deal. Coca Cola is one of the biggest polluters in the world, and it's actively sponsoring recycling efforts because it SHIFTS THE BLAME. Everyone bringing up plastic pollution has been ridiculed for DECADES. Consider omnipresent sugar, and the campaign to demonize fats in food. Consider cholesterol or butter. And you're telling me I should just jump at 5G with only a few years of studies? I don't need 5G, autonomous auto industry needs it. I'll gladly be called a lunatic, idiot, paranoid and worse for being skeptical, patient and cautious.

miked85 6y ago

> Westerners love chairs and shoes I am missing the reference here, how do chairs and shoes compare to radium and lead?

b0rsuk 6y ago
They cause health problems on the level comparable to smoking or bad sleep.
- np_tedious 6y ago
  Chairs and shoes cause health problems? Can you tell me more? I get that sitting an excessive amount of the day, or wearing shoes for all your waking hours, can be bad. Is that all you mean or is there something more?
  - b0rsuk 6y ago
    Basically wearing shoes puts more stress on your knee and skeletal system. More feet and knee problems over time. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/going-barefoot-is-good-for-the-sole/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/going-barefoot-is... The biomechanical differences between barefoot and shod distance running: a systematic review and preliminary meta-analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23996137/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23996137/ Studies show being barefoot makes you smarter! https://www.yourmodernfamily.com/barefoot-kids/ https://www.yourmodernfamily.com/barefoot-kids/ https://breakingmuscle.com/fitness/the-pros-and-cons-of-barefoot-running-what-the-research-says https://breakingmuscle.com/fitness/the-pros-and-cons-of-bare... As for sitting, there are countless studies showing it's bad for health, posture, even causing hemorrhoids. Just search for 'sitting harmful'. There's a lot more consensus on this than barefoot vs shod.
    - KozmoNau7 6y ago
      Reading the sources, it would be more correct to say that overly cushioned shoes are the problem, not all shoes. For running, you have to unlearn the heel strike type of stride that most people adopt when they use cushioned running shoes. You need to roll your feet as you land, just as if you were running barefoot. I don't run much, but for walking I've preferred solid soles made from high durometer rubber for a while now, because they beat up my feet a lot less than a pair of cushioned sneakers for long walks, and it's a lot better than going barefoot in -5C weather :-) My dad wore clogs for most of his working life. Not the old-fashioned carved wooden ones, but the type with leather uppers and a glued on anti-slip layer of rubber on thick wooden soles. He said they were the most comfortable working shoes for varied surfaces and uneven ground.

type0 6y ago

Personally I think uranium glassware looks very cool, you wouldn't want to shatter it or eat or drink from it, but it sure looks amazing.

bawolff 6y ago

> Ancient Romans loved lead, not just for water pipes but for cups and vats they used to boil defrutum, a very popular syrup added to wine. Ancient romans were also aware it was bad for you (Vitruvius wrote about it in first century BC) Similarly with radium, i dont know about your specific examples but many of the egregious unsafe commercial radiation things happened after scientists knew the dangers. That's very different than 5g and GMOs where there is basically no evidence of risk despite much study.

NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
Regarding 5G I thought the same but according to Sabine it is not quite clear it is safe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBsP-bmDLOo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBsP-bmDLOo [14:00] "Now the thing is if you look what is known about the health risks from long-term exposure to the new millimeter waves band, there are basically no studies. "
- jiggawatts 6y ago
  There have been studies, just not many. It's hard to get funding to study something where there isn't a theoretically plausible mechanism for damage, and where the few experiments to "double check" found nothing, as expected. Millimeter waves aren't "new" either. The "new" part is using mm waves for data. For decades now there have been tons of applications for mm wave radiation, and often at much higher power levels. All sorts of satellite communications, radar, etc... This isn't a situation where some scientist discovers an entirely new mechanism as says "wow, this funny radiation that makes things glow in the dark might have some practical application". Instead, it's just a matter of VLSI digital radio circuitry finally reaching the point where we can utilise a very familiar part of the spectrum for high bandwidth data. Most of the anti-5G commentary is by uneducated Facebook moms "just asking questions" and "worried about their kids". If you want to reduce your personal risk from mobile phones, don't text and drive.
  - NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
    I hear you, but this is a type of thing that creates opinion division and additional paranoia. Sabina is physicist, and I do not know your credentials, I would need to conclude behind logic and little and no actual references you have provided. You may say, "you should do the research", but we do not time to research every little thing. So, I would go with a motion that for "5G we do not know". Why? I lived in a place where people believed, or had very serious fear from the draft (light indoor "wind") and that it causes all kind of illnesses. Then, around mid of my life, all kind of jokes were made on that subject. But, using logically I concluded despite jokes that there can be some issues, as in sedentary life, outside tissue if it gets cooled, blood vessels will shrink causing the poor supply of oxygen and nutrients, during a prolonged time that can cause some serious "buildup" and issues. Now, later on, that logic was confirmed by studies and western science. Jokes were still there, and older people still have (now) justifiable fear, but non of two groups knows about the study. It is not hard to say "I do not know", and you and I, we do not. Humans as a whole do not know much, we do not know does microwave with smallest quantities impact metabolic intake of let say vitamins, we do not know does some of the minerals has a resonant frequency that will prevent mineral being absorbed in the cells, we do not know it is there some kind of impact on skin cells or hair follicles, will any of the tissue behave as an antenna, we do not know much. Yes, it looks semi-logical that it is low-level energy and it can be stopped by a thin wall, but a wall is not live and does not care. Our bodies are complex mechanism, still, in 21st century we are trying do neurosurgery with stone-age axes. And each period of history, we do the same, when we do not know something, we use humans Guinea pigs, and when things go wrong, then we try to fix issues. Each time is on a larger scale and each time is a more serious issue. Asbestos, forever chemicals (PFAS, PFOS and PFOA), endocrine disruptors, oil industry, plastic, leaded petrol, chlorine in the water ... and always the same pattern, there is an excess of something, there is "bright" idea, big money of course, and always do before the study, because at that time we find it "necessary". So, we convince the public that it is necessary, and they must follow... And above all, dynamic of many human conversations is driven by "trying to be right" instead doing actual scientific study and action on facts. One thing I agree 100% texting and driving does kill.

delusional 6y ago

They have the right to be wary of whatever they like, but they don't get to dictate public policy or be taken seriously unless they do the research, and research is not searching on google. Doubting the safety of a material should lead you to devise experiments that prove your doubts. It should not be taken as truth or acted on as doubts. If you are too lazy or incompetent to do the experiments yourself, you don't get to be listened to as a serious contributor.

b0rsuk 6y ago
Ancient Romans, asbestos and radioactive material users probably also thought they did research.