It’s a valuable asset to Scientists as well as other analytical thinkers, to be able to distinguish between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
Ionizing radiation won’t just alter some molecules within the human body, but will alter any molecule in our bodies, including genes. And this last phenomenon, is one reason for which ionizing radiation, at low, prolonged exposures, causes an increase in the risk of cancer. This includes neutrons and gamma-rays, but also, if originated within the body, alpha and beta radiation as they were originally named: Energetic Helium Nuclei and Electrons.
On the other hand, radio-waves including microwaves are non-ionizing radiation. This means that although in some cases correlation with leukemia and other cancers were noted, nobody has yet explained how radio-waves and microwaves could cause cancers, because we don’t really know what these waves do within our bodies, other than ‘To increase the amount of vibration between our molecules.’ This last excuse is quite non-factual, because the very temperature of our bodies is already causing its molecules to vibrate. Hence, an adult male who takes a 10 minute bath in 40⁰C hot water, is unlikely to be able to conceive directly afterward, but also won’t get leukemia either.
And yet, the simple fact that we don’t know the explanation for a phenomenon, is not itself proof that the phenomenon does not exist, or that it never takes place.
What caused me to pause and think, was the fact that women are considerably more likely to develop breast-cancer in their left breasts, than they are in their right breasts. Why would that happen? I’ve seen people pounce on such explanations, as the fact that statistically, woman’s left breasts are also slightly larger than their right breasts. But in fact, this sort of explanation is equally nonsensical, because on the average, woman’s left breasts would need to be at least twice as large as their right breasts, in order to cause such a large deviation. Are they?
A basic question which I’d like an answer to next would be, ‘Is it possible that actual genetic material, such as chromosomes, are paramagnetic?’ If they are, then they will be vibrating in response to EMFs, radio waves and microwaves, much more strongly, than the rest of the cell’s physical substance, and more strongly, than as a result of thermal agitation alone.
I think that what most right-handed people tend to do – who wear shirts – is just to slip their cell-phones into their left shirt-pockets.
(Update 07/21/2018 : )
In reality, substances which exhibit paramagnetism, to dot necessarily need to contain the element Iron. For example, permanent magnets have been made, such as Samarium-Cobalt magnets, Aluminum-Nickel-Cobalt magnets, aka ‘Alnico Magnets’. But one feature which paramagnetic compounds do have in common, is an unpaired electron, in spite of all the atoms being covalently bonded already, which according to basic Chemistry, should complete all their octets. In other words, Iron in its pure form, and many other compounds, happen to have unpaired electrons, even though the bonding between atoms, should hypothetically take care of that.
Because genetic material is organic material which has no obvious way, still to contain unpaired electrons, even though covalently bonded, it should not really exhibit any paramagnetism.