I'm usually very patient with the leftovers of the "ionizing only" crowd and what you call "gish galloping" (huh?!) was my attempt at nudging you to discover the science that shows that worldview to be outdated.
So when you write:
"...and theoretical mechanisms for harm of RF below ionizing levels has never been proven to anything close to a statistical significance or in ways that are reproducible" ...I lose that patience with people not even interested in looking.
Look up Yakymenko et al. 2015 "Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation". Full-text link:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279863242_Oxidative...
Excerpt: "...among 100 currently available peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, in general, 93 confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems. A wide pathogenic potential of the induced ROS and their involvement in cell signaling pathways explains a range of biological/health effects of low-intensity RFR, which include both cancer and non-cancer pathologies."
Yes, the word "cancer" is in there along with "low-intensity RFR". The pathway is free-radical promotion in cells by RF and subsequent damage to proteins, DNA etc.
Keep believing the "ionizing only" line if you want. You're allowed to have an opinion. But then its just you against the peer-reviewed & published data.
So when you write: "...and theoretical mechanisms for harm of RF below ionizing levels has never been proven to anything close to a statistical significance or in ways that are reproducible" ...I lose that patience with people not even interested in looking.
Look up Yakymenko et al. 2015 "Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation". Full-text link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279863242_Oxidative...
Excerpt: "...among 100 currently available peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, in general, 93 confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems. A wide pathogenic potential of the induced ROS and their involvement in cell signaling pathways explains a range of biological/health effects of low-intensity RFR, which include both cancer and non-cancer pathologies."
Yes, the word "cancer" is in there along with "low-intensity RFR". The pathway is free-radical promotion in cells by RF and subsequent damage to proteins, DNA etc.
Keep believing the "ionizing only" line if you want. You're allowed to have an opinion. But then its just you against the peer-reviewed & published data.