Rank Amateur
Gold $$ Contributor
My apologies if I caused offense, not my intention. I'm also not claiming (nor suggesting) that anyone should ignore the possibility of a link (radiation-induced cancers are somewhat more than pure theory, and minimization of radiation exposure is always a good plan). I'm reacting to junk science presented by junk scientists as if it is actionable. We're all exposed to mountains of this stuff lately. Correlative anecdotal evidence used to be publicly ridiculed, now it is celebrated as genius.OK. Got it.
Your standard of actionable data is different from mine. I don't need indisputable data to tell me it's not a good idea to put my head forward of the radar chronograph, inside of .2 meters.
I'm fine with anecdotal evidence steering me away from certain behaviors that may negatively impact my health. I'm not saying that's the case here, that's why I started this thread, I wanted more information. I'm just saying I don't need double blind studies and whatnot as my only guide here.
Folks in their 70s may have different thresholds for what they care about than a guy in his 30s.
It's a good idea not to expose yourself to microwave radiation whenever possible. Not standing directly in front of Labradars is good advice despite the fact that there has been no testing of harmful effects of this practice. As you say, you started the thread because you wanted more information. That's good, because the information provided in the news stories is GARBAGE and meaningless. I also don't rely strictly on double-blind, randomized studies before I make evidence-based decisions. The "evidence" provided in the original articles, however, ISN'T evidence of anything. My posts were intended inform evaluation of that initial information. That isn't the same as me or anyone recommending that you stand closely in the path of a microwave source.