5 ms·

Speaking of UV-A, I’m not a conspiracy theorist on this, but it reminded me that a common retort I’ve read given to “RF, routers, etc cause cancer” theories is

by zzt123 5y ago

Speaking of UV-A, I’m not a conspiracy theorist on this, but it reminded me that a common retort I’ve read given to “RF, routers, etc cause cancer” theories is that those are non-ionizing radiation and therefore are safe. Yet, UV-A is non-ionizing and definitely does cause cancer. Just a random brain connection that was made.

sudosysgen 5y ago
UV-A mainly causes cancer by denaturing proteins such as collagen and vitamin A, which indirectly can cause cancer. That's still heavily dependent on the energy of the photon, so real low frequency radiation like that used in telecoms can't use similar mechanisms.
Pulcinella 5y ago
UV-A is generally non-ionizing, but that doesn’t mean it can’t cause electronic transitions that lead to chemical reactions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_electronic_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_electronic_transitio... UV-A can create Thymine diners in your DNA, for example. No ionization required. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrimidine_dimer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrimidine_dimer
spoonjim 5y ago
Why do people feel the need to deny being “conspiracy theorists?” Many conspiracy theories have been proven true: they were spying on all of your phone calls, they did know that cigarettes cause cancer, etc. Would it be so surprising to find out that consumer RF was giving us cancer but the tech industry was making too much money off it to tell us?
- beagle3 5y ago
  Because one of those successful conspiracies was to brand the natural word “conspiracy” to imply craziness.
- playing_colours 5y ago
  To me “a conspiracy theorist” is a person with a specific mindset: they dedicate their time to learning about and sharing conspiracy theories - usually they believe in several ones - with an unconscious intention not to find real answers, but to prove their beliefs. Cautiously suggesting that some unproved assumption may be true and needs more research or using scientific methods to validate it does not make a person “conspiracy theorist” or “freak”, though ,unfortunately, they are often labelled as such in our society.

by zzt123 5y ago

sudosysgen 5y ago

UV-A mainly causes cancer by denaturing proteins such as collagen and vitamin A, which indirectly can cause cancer. That's still heavily dependent on the energy of the photon, so real low frequency radiation like that used in telecoms can't use similar mechanisms.

Pulcinella 5y ago

UV-A is generally non-ionizing, but that doesn’t mean it can’t cause electronic transitions that lead to chemical reactions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_electronic_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_electronic_transitio... UV-A can create Thymine diners in your DNA, for example. No ionization required. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrimidine_dimer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrimidine_dimer

spoonjim 5y ago

Why do people feel the need to deny being “conspiracy theorists?” Many conspiracy theories have been proven true: they were spying on all of your phone calls, they did know that cigarettes cause cancer, etc. Would it be so surprising to find out that consumer RF was giving us cancer but the tech industry was making too much money off it to tell us?

beagle3 5y ago
Because one of those successful conspiracies was to brand the natural word “conspiracy” to imply craziness.
playing_colours 5y ago
To me “a conspiracy theorist” is a person with a specific mindset: they dedicate their time to learning about and sharing conspiracy theories - usually they believe in several ones - with an unconscious intention not to find real answers, but to prove their beliefs. Cautiously suggesting that some unproved assumption may be true and needs more research or using scientific methods to validate it does not make a person “conspiracy theorist” or “freak”, though ,unfortunately, they are often labelled as such in our society.