The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) recently declared “outdoor air pollution” as: "Class 1, Carcinogenic to Humans." In 2011, the same IARC declared all wireless communication emissions as: "Class 2b, Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans." Aren't we humans supposed to be wise enough to learn from our mistakes?
Do we really think it's wise to be constantly in air that is polluted with the non-natural electromagnetic radiation that pumps out from all big and small wireless electronic devices and networks? Are we too stubborn or too lazy to learn from our "traditional" outdoor air pollution mistakes?
I'd like to think that we're wise enough to see the sense in making choices that reduce this relatively "modern" type of air pollution before it gets out of hand.
It took centuries for "outdoor air pollution" to make its way to the worst recognition at the top of IARC's 5-level ranking regarding carcinogenicity. IARC positioned wireless communication emissions at the midpoint of that 5-level ranking in 2011, and their reasoning included a need for more research to be conducted because this is a relatively new air pollutant in human experience and because it's heavy and widespread exposure. A mere 2 years later (not centuries), scientists are already urging that wireless communication emissions be raised to the next level in the IARC ranking (closer to the top level where "outdoor air pollution" is).
There are plenty of existing ways to personally, publicly, and globally reduce this modern air pollutant. Plus, we're talking about technology ... we know that Homo sapiens are clearly capable of making innovations in technology that reduce harm, eliminate harm, and prevent harm. That would be real progress. Just do it.
No comments:
Post a Comment