Microwave ovens...handy or deadly

[Dave]

Russian researchers also reported a marked acceleration of structural
degradation leading to a decreased food value of 60 to 90% in all foods
tested. Among the changes observed were:

From 1957 and up to the present [until the end of the cold war], the
Russian research operations were conducted at: the Institute of Radio
Technology at Kinsk, Byelorussian Autonomous Region; and, at the Institute
of Radio Technology at Rajasthan in the Rossiskaja Autonomous Region, both
in the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics.

until the end of the cold war? anything newer?

 

[Gonz]

read the attatched text, it is worrisome.

I'm still looking into it but it seems limited to a few studies & a gag order.

The Swiss biologist Dr. H.U. Hertel together with Prof. Bernard Blanc: "....proved that food which had been cooked in a microwave oven caused significant changes in the blood immediately after incorporation by the test persons." (Blanc, B. H./Hertel H.U. 1992 H. Ande Weg Vom Mikrowellenherd - Raum & Zeit Special Nr. 6, Ehlers, Sauerlach.)
The authors noted, "... that these changes, some of which could be called highly significant, indicated the beginning of a pathological process, e.g. the beginning of a cancer."
An excerpt from a letter Professor Dr. Bernard Blanc sent to Dr. Hans U. Hertel. "The measurable effects on man through ingestion of microwaved foods, unlike untreated food are blood alterations, that can also be found at the beginning of a pathological condition, as also indicative of a beginning cancerous process."

 

[Dave]

Microwave cooking does not reduce the nutritional value of foods any more than conventional cooking. In fact, foods cooked in a microwave oven may keep more of their vitamins and minerals, because microwave ovens can cook more quickly and without adding water

Much research is under way on microwaves and how they might affect the human body. It is known that microwave radiation can heat body tissue the same way it heats food. Exposure to high levels of microwaves can cause a painful burn. The lens of the eye is particularly sensitive to intense heat, and exposure to high levels of microwaves can cause cataracts. Likewise, the testes are very sensitive to changes in temperature. Accidental exposure to high levels of microwave energy can alter or kill sperm, producing temporary sterility. But these types of injuries - burns, cataracts, temporary sterility - can only be caused by exposure to large amounts of microwave radiation, much more than can leak from a microwave oven.
Less is known about what happens to people exposed to low levels of microwaves. To find out, large numbers of people who had been exposed to microwaves would have to be studied for many years. This information is not available. Much research has been done with experimental animals, but it is difficult to translate the effects of microwaves on animals to possible effects on humans. For one thing, there are differences in the way animals and humans absorb microwaves. For another, experimental conditions can't exactly simulate the conditions under which people use microwave ovens. However, these studies do help to better understand the possible effects of radiation.One experiment, for example, showed that repeated exposure to low-level microwave radiation (less than 10 milliwatts per square centimeter) does not cause cataracts in rabbits. On the other hand, some animals display an avoidance reaction when exposed to low levels of microwaves - that is, they try to get away from the microwaves. Other effects noted in experimental animals include a decreased ability to perform certain tasks, genetic changes and an "immune response" (the body acts as if it were responding to protect itself from a disease).
While these and similar effects have been observed in animals, their significance for human health remains unclear.These kinds of findings, together with the fact that many scientific questions about exposure to low-levels of microwaves are not yet answered, point to the need for FDA to continue to enforce strict radiation controls. They also underscore the need for consumers to take certain common sense precautions.

http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/consumer/microwave.html


the best i could do tonight...i'll look some more tomorrow... its late and i have to work in the am...

 

[Camelyn]

First of all Dr. Lita Lee never wrote an article for the lancet about the danger of microwaved baby formula. You can check the lancet archives:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01406736

Instead, there is an article by 3 researchers stating "that milk heated in the microwave oven produce cis-stereosomers of hydroxyproline and cis -amino acid. It also produce d-proline. The concentration was estimated to be 1-2 mg/L. The researchers worried about the effect of the cis form because it could be incorporated in proteins and change their configuration and immunoligical properties. d-proline can potentially be a neurotoxin if injected into the brain of 2-5 day old chick. Therefore the researcher stated that effect should be investigated

this was critiqued in Lancet of Feb 4 335 (8697) 470, then Mar 31 335 (8692) 792 which had a mistake and was corrected on apr 7 335 (8693) 868 and was finally critiqued on Jul 7 336 (8706) 49.

The author of the research also stated that its was not to test the toxicity of microwave food but to have a model of the event of microwaving."

source

Dr. Lita Lee used the Lancet information and added her own personal commentary, which was then either fraudulently or erroneously credited to publication in the Lancet. You may want to check out her website, which has all kinds of stuff she would like to sell to you: Dr. Lee

Secondly, these changes are likely related to heating and not the microwave process, per say, and therefore would occur even if the formula was heated on a stove.

Finally the only proven dangers that microwaving formula would entail would be an uneven heating of the formula, creating the possiblility for a burn if the formula is not mixed well after heating.

One more thing. I found this one solitary article on a whole bunch of holistic websites (example, as well as on some Christian sites (example ) where microwaving is decryed as "unnatural".

Same goes for the other sources. Any research quoted is decades out of date, questionably sourced, vagely referenced and unsubstantiated.

IMO this all boils down to propeganda and just another marketing tool for "natural products" and a natural, God-fearing lifestyle.

Editied to add: I am not at all against either Holistic/natural medicine or lifestyles, nor am I anti-Christian. What I am against is false representation of the facts, or sloppy research, which is used to convince people to use their products or believe what they believe. Especially when this misinformation is medical and/or alarmist in nature.

 

[Camelyn]

Just wanted to add that the (outdated) Russian research and the Swiss research are quoted in all these "anti-microwave" articles on the websites I mentioned above. The same ones, over and over, without any corroborating research or data given. I didn't take the time to follow-up, but I can if needed.

 

[Luis G]

BTW, the doctor who neglected simple tests for such obvious symptoms of a heart problem such as an EKG which would have almost certainly saved his life got his degree from the University of Mexico (Luis, you better be VERY careful).

There are assholes everywhere, thou, i doubt he had the full degree and license (cédula profesional) to work in the medical field.

 

[chcr]

Just wanted to add that the (outdated) Russian research and the Swiss research are quoted in all these "anti-microwave" articles on the websites I mentioned above. The same ones, over and over, without any corroborating research or data given. I didn't take the time to follow-up, but I can if needed.

The end izz neeer!!!!!!

And yes Gonz, I did read the text.

 

[Gato_Solo]

It's bad enough that many babies are not nursed, but now
they are given fake milk (baby formula) made even more toxic via
microwaving.

I know what you mean. I prefer to suckle on a natural breast (non-lactating, of course) myself. The fake ones just don't do anything for me...