6 ms·

> radiation I don't doubt much of what you're saying, but is there any evidence to support that modern life exposes you to any more harmful radiation than life

by gspr 6y ago

> radiation I don't doubt much of what you're saying, but is there any evidence to support that modern life exposes you to any more harmful radiation than life in the past did?

FieryTransition 6y ago
Cigarettes for once, can expose you to way more rads than what is healthy [0]. [0] https://www.verywellmind.com/radioactive-chemicals-in-cigarettes-4121185 https://www.verywellmind.com/radioactive-chemicals-in-cigare...
- gspr 6y ago
  Fair enough. I kinda forgot that smoking is still a thing. But it's been on a big decline for years, hasn't it? Surely this isn't some new and growing danger?
  - FieryTransition 6y ago
    Probably has, even though there's still a lot of people who smoke. Think it will be a while before it really can be considered a more rare occurrence/habit. Considering how many people still do it, it could be considered as part of our culture. Otherwise i don't know any sources of radiation. Besides some places where the atmosphere is getting thin, and getting skin cancer is very normal, like Australia.
    - gspr 6y ago
      > Besides some places where the atmosphere is getting thin, and getting skin cancer is very normal, like Australia. I thought the ozone situation had been getting a lot better since the 90s?
      - FieryTransition 6y ago
        It is getting better, but it won't really recover until 2050 to 2060's AFAIK. That said, there are other gasses which might still be bad to let into the atmosphere, so we still don't understand it a 100% There's also the ozone hole, which partly affects Australia [0], but mostly Antarctica. I think it is really interesting, that about 2/3 of people in Australia will get skin cancer at some point, and I've wondered whether it's due to the increased exposure to, what is essentially radiation, or just the mass migration of people who were originally not native to the region. Thus they don't handle the sun as well, as say, Aboriginals. [0] https://www.villageinframe.com/ozone-layer-hole-in-australia/ https://www.villageinframe.com/ozone-layer-hole-in-australia...
giantg2 6y ago
Yes, there have been numerous studies showing that the radio frequencies (radiation) used by cell phones and wifi are correlated (maybe causative, but not 100% sure) to reduced sperm count and quality. This is especially true when you have your phone in your pocket or your laptop on your lap. Stuff like wifi and cellphones were not a thing in the past. There just weren't many consumer RF products a generation or two ago - phones had cords, there was no wifi or even internet, no bluetooth headphones or refrigerators, etc. Most of the RF radiation was produced by commerical or government sources (plus some ham radio), such as FM, AM, and military communications. This generally meant that you were far away from the source, which means they where mostly using different wavelengths and the power you recieved was lower (you quadruple power loss when doubling distance). Now days, you have multiple cell phones in your home, wifi at home and work (work can really blast you with all the access points they seem to over-install), bluetooth and a cell card in many new cars, and IoT devices seemingly everywhere. Not to mention it seems we have more commercial exposure too. We have GPS, satellite TV, StarLink, cell towers, etc all vying for 100% coverage. However, I didn't look up the wavelengths, so these might not be an issue, or might cause some other kind of issue. I guess I'm just saying it should be no surprise that sperm count and quality is decreasing if we know that certain RF is linked to it and we are increasing that RF exposure.
- manmal 6y ago
  Having a warm/hot laptop on your lap is definitely not a good idea for fertility.
- gspr 6y ago
  > Yes, there have been numerous studies showing that the radio frequencies (radiation) used by cell phones and wifi are correlated (maybe causative, but not 100% sure) to reduced sperm count and quality. Do you have some references? > This is especially true when you have your phone in your pocket or your laptop on your lap. Are you sure you're not mixing up heat and radiation here? OK, technically radiative heat is radiation, but surely that's not what you meant. Sitting outside on a warm day with a pillow on your crotch probably isn't good for your sperm either, but it doesn't seem honest to chalk that up to radiation (even though technically radiative may have warmed you in the first place). > Not to mention it seems we have more commercial exposure too. We have GPS, satellite TV, StarLink, cell towers, etc all vying for 100% coverage. However, I didn't look up the wavelengths, so these might not be an issue, or might cause some other kind of issue. I'm sorry, this is pure speculation unless you can back it up by something. "We didn't have all these things in the past" isn't an argument for anything. It's like claiming that the cumulative number of HN comments is rising while sperm quality is decreasing, hence HN is killing sperm. > I guess I'm just saying it should be no surprise that sperm count and quality is decreasing if we know that certain RF is linked to it and we are increasing that RF exposure. Do we know that those kinds of RF are linked to it? X-rays to your balls, sure! But GPS and cellphones? Evidence, please.
jandrese 6y ago
The above ground nuclear testing in the Atomic Age certainly increased background radiation levels.

by gspr 6y ago

> radiation I don't doubt much of what you're saying, but is there any evidence to support that modern life exposes you to any more harmful radiation than life in the past did?

FieryTransition 6y ago

Cigarettes for once, can expose you to way more rads than what is healthy [0]. [0] https://www.verywellmind.com/radioactive-chemicals-in-cigarettes-4121185 https://www.verywellmind.com/radioactive-chemicals-in-cigare...

gspr 6y ago
Fair enough. I kinda forgot that smoking is still a thing. But it's been on a big decline for years, hasn't it? Surely this isn't some new and growing danger?
- FieryTransition 6y ago
  Probably has, even though there's still a lot of people who smoke. Think it will be a while before it really can be considered a more rare occurrence/habit. Considering how many people still do it, it could be considered as part of our culture. Otherwise i don't know any sources of radiation. Besides some places where the atmosphere is getting thin, and getting skin cancer is very normal, like Australia.
  - gspr 6y ago
    > Besides some places where the atmosphere is getting thin, and getting skin cancer is very normal, like Australia. I thought the ozone situation had been getting a lot better since the 90s?
    - FieryTransition 6y ago
      It is getting better, but it won't really recover until 2050 to 2060's AFAIK. That said, there are other gasses which might still be bad to let into the atmosphere, so we still don't understand it a 100% There's also the ozone hole, which partly affects Australia [0], but mostly Antarctica. I think it is really interesting, that about 2/3 of people in Australia will get skin cancer at some point, and I've wondered whether it's due to the increased exposure to, what is essentially radiation, or just the mass migration of people who were originally not native to the region. Thus they don't handle the sun as well, as say, Aboriginals. [0] https://www.villageinframe.com/ozone-layer-hole-in-australia/ https://www.villageinframe.com/ozone-layer-hole-in-australia...

giantg2 6y ago

Yes, there have been numerous studies showing that the radio frequencies (radiation) used by cell phones and wifi are correlated (maybe causative, but not 100% sure) to reduced sperm count and quality. This is especially true when you have your phone in your pocket or your laptop on your lap. Stuff like wifi and cellphones were not a thing in the past. There just weren't many consumer RF products a generation or two ago - phones had cords, there was no wifi or even internet, no bluetooth headphones or refrigerators, etc. Most of the RF radiation was produced by commerical or government sources (plus some ham radio), such as FM, AM, and military communications. This generally meant that you were far away from the source, which means they where mostly using different wavelengths and the power you recieved was lower (you quadruple power loss when doubling distance). Now days, you have multiple cell phones in your home, wifi at home and work (work can really blast you with all the access points they seem to over-install), bluetooth and a cell card in many new cars, and IoT devices seemingly everywhere. Not to mention it seems we have more commercial exposure too. We have GPS, satellite TV, StarLink, cell towers, etc all vying for 100% coverage. However, I didn't look up the wavelengths, so these might not be an issue, or might cause some other kind of issue. I guess I'm just saying it should be no surprise that sperm count and quality is decreasing if we know that certain RF is linked to it and we are increasing that RF exposure.

manmal 6y ago
Having a warm/hot laptop on your lap is definitely not a good idea for fertility.
gspr 6y ago
> Yes, there have been numerous studies showing that the radio frequencies (radiation) used by cell phones and wifi are correlated (maybe causative, but not 100% sure) to reduced sperm count and quality. Do you have some references? > This is especially true when you have your phone in your pocket or your laptop on your lap. Are you sure you're not mixing up heat and radiation here? OK, technically radiative heat is radiation, but surely that's not what you meant. Sitting outside on a warm day with a pillow on your crotch probably isn't good for your sperm either, but it doesn't seem honest to chalk that up to radiation (even though technically radiative may have warmed you in the first place). > Not to mention it seems we have more commercial exposure too. We have GPS, satellite TV, StarLink, cell towers, etc all vying for 100% coverage. However, I didn't look up the wavelengths, so these might not be an issue, or might cause some other kind of issue. I'm sorry, this is pure speculation unless you can back it up by something. "We didn't have all these things in the past" isn't an argument for anything. It's like claiming that the cumulative number of HN comments is rising while sperm quality is decreasing, hence HN is killing sperm. > I guess I'm just saying it should be no surprise that sperm count and quality is decreasing if we know that certain RF is linked to it and we are increasing that RF exposure. Do we know that those kinds of RF are linked to it? X-rays to your balls, sure! But GPS and cellphones? Evidence, please.

jandrese 6y ago

The above ground nuclear testing in the Atomic Age certainly increased background radiation levels.