5 things they say give you cancer (and why they're wrong) - health care appliances

Scientists and journalists have been coming up with different ways to scare people for decades, and their favorite is probably to convince the public that almost everything they come into contact with can lead to some form of cancer.
Most of these cancer fears are unfounded, or at least grossly exaggerated, which unfortunately does not reduce their popularity.
That's what we're talking about. . .
In 1993, when his cell phone company claimed that his late wife had given her a brain tumor by constantly using her cell phone, the phone call began.
He claimed the tumor was an "antenna-
Shape ", it's on the side of her head.
This is the case with cancer, right?
Despite this conclusive testimony, the case was immediately dismissed due to lack of evidence (
What legal experts call "non-evidence ").
However, the loss has been caused, and the mobile phone industry has suffered a public relations disaster, and they have spent $25 million in research to crush the charge.
There have been hundreds of studies on cell phone use and cancer since 1993, and most of them have no results.
The problem is that the phone only exists for a short time, long enough to download a few episodes perfectly, but not enough to determine if the device is x-
Take your brain.
Despite the temporary setbacks, the big case
The control study provides enough evidence to researchers around the world to allow them to conclude with relative certainty that unless you send a tweet from Bianca atoll with a BlackBerry, the phone will not give you a tumor. The case-
The control study and comparison of their past mobile phone usage found no connection between the two.
In addition, the cancer has no connection between which side of the head and which side of the phone, although there is an amazing connection between patients with severe brain tumors and wallpaper downloads in the movie.
One of the most popular artificial sweeteners (
And the so-called death agent)
ASBA sweet, which is usually sold in the name of Nutrasweet.
From diet soda to chewing gum, it can be found in a lot of food.
However, in 1996, a shocking report was released, and the number of people with brain tumors increased between 1975 and 1992.
Not only that, according to the report, laboratory rats served with ASBA sweet in a cool, refreshing diet soda were found to have an increased chance of developing lymphoma or leukemia, neither cool nor refreshing.
Needless to say, most people are freaking out if you're trying to search Google for Aspen sweet. . .
According to the National Cancer Institute, the increase in brain and central nervous system cancer began in 1973, eight years before the emergence of assweet.
Unless there are a few crazy scientists who go back in time and spill things into everyone's drink, we will continue to believe in NCI.
Cancer is their strength.
As for the experimental rats used in the study, these animals have been introduced to a large amount of ASBA sweet, and they deserve singing and legend.
From the point of view, the rats with the smallest traces of cancer (
We're talking like a cancer cell.
Being introduced to humans is equivalent to 8 cans of diet soda a day.
The most serious cancer
There are about 2,083 cans per day of the Tastic rat.
Yes, we are pretty sure that if you drink that much, even if it is V8 vegetable juice rich in the world's best vitamins, you will explode like a balloon.
Long term side effects are really the last problem you need.
Microwave ovens have made people a little nervous about the idea of cooking food through some kind of invisible death ray, so rumors about health risks have been circulating since the invention of microwave ovens.
There are two main rumors, the first one is about stray radiation causing cancer to you, but the second and most recent one is about carcinogens (cancer-causers)
When heated by microwave, this substance is produced in the food.
It all began in the 1980 s when a scientist named Hans Hertel ate only a little microwave --
Vegetables and milk prepared for the whole two months (
We think that their fart alone can cause cancer).
Two months later, Hertel suddenly came out and stated his findings: "[Men's Blood
It appears to indicate the initial stage of the pathological process, such as at the beginning of the cancer condition.
"Since then, a lot of research has been done on the effects of microwave heating and the radiation emitted every time you heat your bodyF. Chang's.
Shortly thereafter, Hans Hertel withdrew from public view, but what he said scared the public.
After all, most people have been using microwaves for many years.
However, if you double check his above statement, he has never provided any evidence that the food prepared with the microwave oven can cause cancer, just it looks like there may be some kind of cancer party going down, maybe.
Not only that, his findings were not based on any scientific evidence, were not published in any type of scientific journal, nor were they ever peer-to-peerreviewed.
At the end of the day, just a bunch of guys improvise at the hotel, so they might as well post their findings on the back of a box of crunchy berries.
The microwaves we know now either destroy someone's DNA or change food in a way that might cause cancer (
Sadly, it also means throwing the spider in the microwave and having it bite you, in fact, won't give you super power).
Actual Micro
The waves used to heat food are No.
That means they don't have cancer-
Producing substances such as ultraviolet rays and X-rays
Rays and other rays as carcinogens.
This is one of the things that could fall into the "no s ** t" category because we haven't seen an explosion of cancer in people around microwaves all day (
Is the person who works in the restaurant)
They were bombed for hours at a time by what they called dangerous radiation.
That doesn't mean it though.
2 power cables, computer monitors. . .
Almost all the power-related things the whole panic of "Power lines bring you Cancer" dates back to 1979, when two researchers named Nancy Wertheimer and Ed Leeper, they found that childhood leukemia is closely related to power lines in some communities in Denver.
They say the reason for this is electronic equipment.
The magnetic field emitted from the line. . .
Same electronic
Television and computer monitors, microwave ovens, and magnetic fields emitted by half of what's around your home.
Naturally, this creates a whole.
Other research storms on current and whether current is really safe to use.
Ironically, these studies are likely to be analyzed using at least one electronic device, so cancer has caused insiders like Matt Damon to have a lot of problems with Nancy and Ed's Denver study, first of all, most importantly, they never actually measured the magnetic field on the power cord (
Kind of like in grade 11, you wrote a paper without reading the book).
So far, any study measuring these areas has not shown a consistent relationship between how strong these areas are and how much cancer people are suffering from.
Secondly, they don't take into account that people who live near the power line are usually very low --
Income families cannot always afford proper health care, nor can they live where their children are not constantly covered by the threat of Electric death.
In fact, studies have pointed out that poverty eradication
People affected by the disaster are at a higher risk of cancer than anyone else because their lives are not enough.
At the same time, there have been hundreds of studies, most of which have the same results: there is not enough evidence to suggest that the magnetic field poses a real cancer risk.
As for the communities in the Denver study, the use of electrical appliances in their homes has actually increased over the past few decades, while the incidence of leukemia has declined.
However, in low-income communities, the number of deaths due to neglect of children, shootings and stab wounds has also increased, so the real cancer is only shirking responsibility in this regard.
Let's face it: Any time you start adding s ** t to people's water supply, they complain.
You can propose a project to dribble at a water treatment plant just to sort things out and you will get protesters the next day.
So for the past century, many have been convinced that the plan to dilute fluoride into water supply is evil.
Whenever a country talks about adding fluoride to water.
So in 1990, when the National Toxicology Program (NTP)(
Obviously, mice are responsible for some serious atrocities on Earth, and our world is taking revenge)
It is found that there is evidence that the incidence of bone cancer is higher, which makes the intestines of everyone who is anti-bone cancer relaxed.
Movement of fluorine.
When a scientist working for Colgate could have tampered with the results of a major 2006 study that demonstrated the connection between fluoride water and bone cancer in boys, it was more evil than any of us could have imagined toothpaste.
Since that 1990 study, more than 50 different studies have tried to demonstrate the link between fluoride water and cancer, that is, there is no evidence of a link between fluoride water and cancer.
Like the power line, the difficulty is that there are unlimited other possible causes of cancer, so the incidence of cancer will float up and down by itself.
You may find that there is a community where interest rates have risen, but they have also been found to be coolant spills from nuclear submarines.
But as a whole, they can't find an increase in cancer in communities that already have fluoride and in communities that don't have it.
Basically, the International Agency for Cancer Research, the American Public Health Service, the National Research Council, the National Health Service, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention all agree that fluoride in tap water will not make you get cancer.
Again, these people will hire to reassure you if you believe in conspiracy.
So they can control your mind. .