Ten Reasons to Throw Your Microwave Out

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:25 AM
link   
and how exactly do you expect me to reheat my chinese food, without a microwave. I believe we take a bigger risk by smoking than by using a micowave. so I think ill keep mine.




posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Long Lance
 


Again, I'm not really clear on why it matters. Maybe you can clear it up for me? I don't know if it does or doesn't occur, mind you, but let's say for the sake of argument that it does.

My reaction is a big "So, nu?"

I don't personally intend to get in there at any rate, nor expose myself to it if I can manage not to in the way of leaks, anyway.

The DNA of food is meaningless - it's a wreck. And if it manages to kill bacteria and viruses beyond that caused by simple heating, then so much the better.

It's not like the microwaves are going to linger in the food and irradiate you in some manner.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Again, I'm not really clear on why it matters. Maybe you can clear it up for me? I don't know if it does or doesn't occur, mind you, but let's say for the sake of argument that it does.

My reaction is a big "So, nu?"



in the context of food, it does not.

afaik, people who love to cast doubt on everything should not be encouraged, though. by letting the issue go, or other forms of laziness, so i did a quick search for more respectable sites mentioning the effect.


Originally posted by NRen2k5

Negative proof.


nah, that's of course much more efficient writing style than mine, but you're looking at sentence structure more than content it seems.

if you managed to show something which credibly explains the anomalous behaviour within the framework of bonding and photon energies, i'd say the anomalous aspect would be gone. this might be considered important, because if you know of one effect you don't really understand, chances are, there's more.

the internet was not created to convince you, if you are unwilling to acknowledge the effect i doubt that anyone is going to lose sleep over it.

edit: more links i ran across
* OT not about cooking *

mutage.oxfordjournals.org...

www.wave-guide.org/archives/emf-l/Jan2001/DNA-damage-and-microwave-radiation-(Bishop)-.html


[edit on 28.10.2007 by Long Lance]



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance
afaik, people who love to cast doubt on everything should not be encouraged, though. by letting the issue go, or other forms of laziness, so i did a quick search for more respectable sites mentioning the effect.


It's interesting - I'm not sure how they exclude heat denaturing which is definitely a way to damage it with low energy photons. But how to do it otherwise? When it's supercoiled or mostly wound around histones, I'm not sure how it ends up long enough to form a lengthwise resonance.

I'm sort of tied up the next two days, probably my last post for the day, but I'll go through your links and whatever else I can dredge up midweek, should be fun.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 07:13 AM
link   
Negative proof. Seriously.

Just because something isn’t proven not to exist doesn’t mean it’s reasonable to assume that it does.

Hell, if I told some members of these boards that vitamins could be dangerous, they’d pop a vein!



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Just read someone post that the "DNA of food is meaningless" -- are you for genetically modified food? That's exactly what the sentence implies.

I don't plan on posting even link to the DANGERS of GMF -- anyone can do that themselves. Since I'm the OP on this one, going to jump back in here and compare microwaved food to GMF -- dangerous.

Back on the topic -- here's a UK Guardian article from 2005:
"Is it okay to use a microwave?"
www.guardian.co.uk...

Lastly, here's a good article that reads a lot like this thread -- controversy. There's some technical and nutritional info. . . .
www.life.ca...



Vitamin B-12 is another nutrient that can be destroyed by microwaving. Japanese research reported in Science News in 1998 found that as little as six minutes of microwave cooking destroyed half of the vitamin B-12 in dairy foods and meat, a much higher rate of destruction than other cooking techniques.


Personally, as the thread suggests, I'll never use the thing, I still find it interesting/good the Russians banned them in the 1970s. I wonder the weight/health of the people arguing these points? Not trying to insult anyone but maybe people are so stuck in their ways -- they'll keep defending this useless instrument.



[edit on 29-10-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
Just read someone post that the "DNA of food is meaningless" -- are you for genetically modified food? That's exactly what the sentence implies.




you are focusing on the DNA itself, but there's more. GMOs' quality control is by design problematic (an example) and proteins built according to modified, faulty DNA will still look differently from natural ones, especially if freak amino acids are involved, because that's one level deeper, so to speak.


besides, the true danger of GMOs lies in the destruction of soil fertility and industrialized agriculture, with its ecological and economical implications. if you want to you can search the board, there's plenty of stuff on Argentina, India, Indonesia and so on and more.

i'm fairly certain that microwaved food should not be consumed regularly, even if the reasons are not yet recognized.


PS:NRen2k5, to some, several pieces of a puzzle form a picture, to others, they do not. microwaved food has obviously been field tested for a long time, so if ill effects exist, they are rather insiduous, like a deficiency or chronic toxicity.

edit: changed due to request

[edit on 29.10.2007 by Long Lance]



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Not really dude should you understand what I meant -- the DANGERS in GMO and microwave ovens. (who will eat GMOs? Probably a lot of people, since a lot of people drink Diet Coke and use microwaves and will probably be sick of disease(s) by 40 something) Since the issue was "DNA of food" -- it's almost the same thing since microwaves CHANGE the molecular structure of food.

Also, saying "simplistic and wrong" to someone's two cents on a topic that hasn't been proven study after study is pretty hardcore. I don't know if you're lost in internet translation or what.

[edit on 29-10-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by anhinga
 


The Guardian article is interesting. The Life article is garbage and biased.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
Just read someone post that the "DNA of food is meaningless" -- are you for genetically modified food? That's exactly what the sentence implies.

I don't plan on posting even link to the DANGERS of GMF -- anyone can do that themselves. Since I'm the OP on this one, going to jump back in here and compare microwaved food to GMF -- dangerous.


Umm, no. You're going on about how it damages the DNA of food.

That doesn't matter, because the DNA of food is not functional and is already degrading, and will be destroyed by any form of cooking. That's what that implies, and all it implies, and hell, I think up thread I even said it explicitly to one of the other posters who was on about the food "mutating" or something. On many a site, you'll see some really oddball ruminations that food can "mutate" due to DNA damage, which is utter bull**** - the food is dead.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
Since the issue was "DNA of food" -- it's almost the same thing since microwaves CHANGE the molecular structure of food.


Not any more than cooking. Go fry an egg in a skillet - what happened? Why is it no longer runny and clear? Hint - the protein molecules were CHANGED!!1!



posted on Oct, 31 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
I didn't say that -- I threw the stat up there. Almost 1 out of 4 people in the U.S. are overweight, although, I imagine if we looked at these kind of stats before the mv oven -- they'd be a lot less. That's something not really worth arguing. . . .

Also, I'll have to disagree w/ you - "heat is heat"?? I won't accept or ever agree w/ that statement -- this seems a little different then fire heating:


Microwaves are a form of electromagnetic energy, like light waves or radio waves, and occupy a part of the electromagnetic spectrum of power, or energy. Microwaves are very short waves of electromagnetic energy that travel at the speed of light (186,282 miles per second). In our modern technological age, microwaves are used to relay long distance telephone signals, television programs, and computer information across the earth or to a satellite in space. But the microwave is most familiar to us as an energy source for cooking food.

Every microwave oven contains a magnetron, a tube in which electrons are affected by magnetic and electric fields in such a way as to produce micro wavelength radiation at about 2450 Mega Hertz (MHz) or 2.45 Giga Hertz (GHz). This microwave radiation interacts with the molecules in food. All wave energy changes polarity from positive to negative with each cycle of the wave. In microwaves, these polarity changes happen millions of times every second. Food molecules - especially the molecules of water - have a positive and negative end in the same way a magnet has a north and a south polarity.


SOURCE



Mod Edit: Reduced Extrernal Quote.

[edit on 15/10/2007 by Mirthful Me]


You wont accept it, because you don't understand that HEAT is by definition increased levels of molecular movement. Whether that is caused by fire or by EMF, HEAT, is HEAT. The only variance is in the temperature, which probably does decrease the vitamins in food much the same way boiling vegetables does.



posted on Nov, 15 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I printed and posted this on the microwaves at my office and highlighted the end, "loss of intelligence."
People think i'm insane.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by NelysStar
 


LOL! You should write-in some of these overweight stats! Wonder why almost HALF of America is overweight OR obese? Try these machines and all the high-artificial, sugar food diets... do a vague search for 'overweight American' and you'll find a slew of articles w/ the topic "frozen dinners" in the subject line.


There is no polite way to say this: Americans are fat, and they're getting fatter. More than 60 million Americans are obese, up from 23 million in 1980. Another 28 million are expected to join their ranks by 2013.

The study found that in 2003-2004, 17.1 percent of 2- to 19-year-olds were obese, up from 13.9 percent in 1999-2000 and 15.4 percent in 2001-02.

The biggest increase was found in 6- to 11-year-olds, up from 15.1 percent in 1999-2000 to 18.8 percent in 2003-04.

The study also found an increase in the number of overweight Americans. In 2003-04, 66.3 percent of adults were overweight, compared with 64.5 percent in 1999-2000 and 65.7 percent in 2001-2002.


Business 2.0: Fat America
money.cnn.com...

Americans Keep Piling on the Pounds
health.dailynewscentral.com...

[edit on 16-11-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by anhinga
 


I think it's fascinating that most people don't realize that anything microwaved is converted into a free radical.
There is a reason that fast food is served in paper.
You know, extreme heat and cold on plastics resonates harmful chemicals into anything it contains.

My two favorite statements I like to throw at people is that microwave popcorn contains Teflon, also a DuPont manufacturant...

www.ohiocitizen.org...

and that Antiperspirant Deodorant contains Aluminum.

No one cares or thinks twice about anything.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by NelysStar
 


Nice link Nelys, you got me LOL twice today!

Should anyone try th is search, there's plenty of reading material to lead you to stop using this machine. Almost 2,00 hits, I'm surprised.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
Just read someone post that the "DNA of food is meaningless" -- are you for genetically modified food?


Anybody who eats any kind of corn or soy product is eating "genetically modified" food. Soybeans, in particular, are almost all modified to be resistant to glyphosate (RoundUp), so we can grow big, healthy plants without weeds choking them off. Humanity has been modifying its food (and domesticated animals) for thousands of years by selective breeding, anyway. The whole GM food argument is political, and not related to health risks, particularly since none have been proven.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 


Hey check this out, not sure if you have seen this. It's some great insight into what you are talkin about.

www.mercola.com...




posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by anhinga
 


So I was telling some people at work about the Aspartame formeldahyde thing. This guy jon ordered pizza + diet coke. He later said that he cracked his soda and took 2 sips and couldn't finish it cause of what I said.

SUCCESS!!!!!



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by NelysStar
 


Bravo Nelys! And from a recent ATSer -- welcome aboard!





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join