Technology risk without safeguards
sabri at cluecentral.net
Thu Nov 5 05:51:40 UTC 2020
----- On Nov 4, 2020, at 7:19 PM, Randy Bush randy at psg.com wrote:
>> The fact that we haven't been able to identify a factual relationship,
>> does not mean that there isn't any.
> just wow
> and, for all we know, the back side of the moon is green cheese
I don't think you got the message buried within my message. True science
is open to change, based on learning new facts. Like I said initially, I
agree with Suresh that at this time, there is no scientific evidence that
links RF with any kind of bodily harm.
The parts that Tom cited, are very much relevant, and only reinforce the
notion that at this time, we simply do not know enough. We do know, that
at the low doses we generally receive, there is no evidence for harmful
My point is that we should not dismiss the physician who thought that he
may have found something, as some kind of conspiracist. That's not how
scientific progress is achieved.
More information about the NANOG