AI summary & topic connections

An engineer working with cellular systems considers the technology safe, argues that public demonstrations of safety would be more useful than open comments, and raises concerns about fear from anecdotal polling.

  • Research & federal duties: “The science, the hard science not the popular science, states that suc”
  • Other concerns: “nications via SCADA systems, and I have zero fear of cellular radio waves and their eeffects.”

Matched review of original text; attachments excluded. Review provenance

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
The science, the hard science not the popular science, states that such wireless signals have minimal penetration depth into animal tissue- not near enough to cause any kind of genetic damage. What needs to happen is public demonstration of why such technology is safe, not open comment to people who might be conspiracy theorist leaning. Such polls will doubtless show a disfavor rate in the teenth percentile at least, a which would be used to create more fear of the benign. I am an engineer who works closely with cellular communications via SCADA systems, and I have zero fear of cellular radio waves and their eeffects.
Research & federal dutiesOther concerns
Official source ↗Open this comment on its own →