Non ionizing radiation contributing to cancer risk is known, with proposed mechanisms, just not widely known. Of course not. Talk to curious researchers trying to get more funding for those kinds of well formed studies. Rejecting the possibility of mechanisms involving NIR is, illogically, based on the assumption that no other mechanism is known beyond that of ionizing radiation, as you described.
The mechanisms are in fact being uncovered in the field of biophysics. So we should not be shocked that if non-ionizing radiation exposures, particularly non-native ELFs and RFs, are altering water chemistry in and around the cells, of course the energetics of the cell are altered and ROS will be elevated.
https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/Entropy/entropy-15-03822.pdf
Also no surprise for example NIR increases glucose metabolism and causes calcium efflux. Nora Volkow has done direct research on Cell Phones effect on Brain Metabolism, where NIR increases glucose consumption drastically while also slowing the efficiency of circadian clocks genes in front of every human gene and is a hallmark of a Warburg Metabolism.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184892/
This coheres with studies going back to the 1960s and Allen Frey demonstrating how polarizing electromagnetic radiation from non-ionizing sources increases permeability of the blood-brain-barrier (which separates the circulating blood from the brain extracellular fluid in the central nervous system), and also of voltage gated ion channels in excitable cell membranes (which regulate the release of neurotransmitters and endocrine signaling among many other functions).
Non ionizing radiation contributing to cancer risk is known, with proposed mechanisms, just not widely known. Of course not. Talk to curious researchers trying to get more funding for those kind of well formed studies. Rejecting the possibility is based on the assumption that no other mechanism is known beyond that of ionizing radiation, as you described.
The mechanisms are in fact being uncovered in the field of biophysics. So we should not be shocked that if non-ionizing radiation exposures, particularly non-native ELFs and RFs, are altering water chemistry in and around the cells, of course the energetics of the cell are altered and ROS will be elevated.
https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/Entropy/entropy-15-03822.pdf
Non ionizing radiation contributing to cancer risk is known, with proposed mechanisms, just not widely known. Of course not. You deny that possibility on the assumption that no other mechanism is known beyond that of ionizing radiation as you described.
The mechanisms are in fact being uncovered in the field of biophysics. So we should not be shocked that if non-ionizing radiation exposures, particularly non-native ELFs and RFs, are altering water chemistry in and around the cells, of course the energetics of the cell are altered and ROS will be elevated.
https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/Entropy/entropy-15-03822.pdf
Non ionizing radiation contributing to cancer risk is known, with proposed mechanisms, just not widely known. Of course not. You deny that possibility simply on the flawed assumption that no other mechanism is known beyond that of ionizing radiation as you described. The mechanisms are in fact being uncovered in the field of biophysics, so we should not be shocked that if non-ionizing radiation exposures, particularly non-native ELFs and RFs, are altering water chemistry in and around the cells, of course the energetics of the cell are altered and ROS will be elevated.
https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/Entropy/entropy-15-03822.pdf