AI summary & topic connections

Criticizes the inquiry and argues that scientific evidence supports the safety of non-ionizing exposure.

  • Research & federal duties: “ense? What could this possibly achieve? The scientific evidence has been looked at. It's fine, as one would expect fro”

Matched review of original text; attachments excluded. Review provenance

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
This is so stupid. Why are you seeking public input on conspiracy theory nonsense? What could this possibly achieve? The scientific evidence has been looked at. It's fine, as one would expect from non-ionizing radiation! We are bombarded by non-ionizing radiation from the sun every day at mich higher intensities and frequencies! It's called visible light! https://www.nature.com/articles/s41370-021-00297-6