Quantcast

Nuking (Microwaving) Your Food and Water is Killing You

Wolfman 2012/02/28 19:30:27
I don't care.  It's just too damn convenient.
Maybe nuking food and water is a bad idea.
I don't understand what you're going on about, Wolfman.
You!
Add Photos & Videos

It has been known for some years that the problem with microwaved
anything is not the radiation people used to worry about, it’s how it
corrupts the DNA in the food so the body can not recognize it.


Microwaves don’t work different ways on different substances.
Whatever you put into the microwave suffers the same destructive
process. Microwaves agitate the molecules to move faster and faster.
This movement causes friction which denatures the original make-up of
the substance. It results in destroyed vitamins, minerals, proteins and
generates the new stuff called radiolytic compounds, things that are not
found in nature.


So the body wraps it in fat cells to protect itself from the dead
food or it eliminates it fast. Think of all the Mothers heating up milk
in these ‘Safe’ appliances. What about the nurse in Canada that warmed
up blood for a transfusion patient and accidentally killed him when the
blood went in dead. But the makers say it’s safe. But proof is in the
pictures of living plants dying!!!


FORENSIC RESEARCH DOCUMENT

Prepared By: William P. Kopp

A. R. E. C. Research Operations

TO61-7R10/10-77F05

RELEASE PRIORITY: CLASS I ROO1a


Ten Reasons to dispose off your Microwave Oven



From the conclusions of the Swiss, Russian and German scientific
clinical studies, we can no longer ignore the microwave oven sitting in
our kitchens. Based on this research, one can conclude this article with
the following:


1). Continually eating food processed from a microwave oven causes
long term – permanent – brain damage by ‘shorting out’ electrical
impulses in the brain [de-polarizing or de-magnetizing the brain
tissue].


2). The human body cannot metabolize [break down] the unknown by-products created in microwaved food.


3). Male and female hormone production is shut down and/or altered by continually eating microwaved foods.


4). The effects of microwaved food by-products are residual [long term, permanent] within the human body.


5). Minerals, vitamins, and nutrients of all microwaved food is
reduced or altered so that the human body gets little or no benefit, or
the human body absorbs altered compounds that cannot be broken down.


6). The minerals in vegetables are altered into cancerous free radicals when cooked in microwave ovens.


7). Microwaved foods cause stomach and intestinal cancerous growths
[tumours]. This may explain the rapidly increased rate of colon cancer
in UK and America .


8). The prolonged eating of microwaved foods causes cancerous cells to increase in human blood.


9). Continual ingestion of microwaved food causes immune system deficiencies through lymph gland and blood serum alterations.

To see what microwaved water does to plants, go here:

http://usahitman.com/microwave-test/

Read More: http://usahitman.com/microwave-test/

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • WhereIsAmerica? ~PWCM~JLA 2012/02/28 20:18:26
    I don't understand what you're going on about, Wolfman.
    WhereIsAmerica? ~PWCM~JLA
    +7
    I would classify this under "junk science". I don't believe anything heated in my microwave is any different than anything heated on my stove, or my grill, or in my standard oven. He is a serious explanation for you.

    "Microwaves are right next to infrared in the electromagnetic spectrum, and cook food just like your broiler in your conventional oven does, except the penetration of microwaves into the food is deeper, so it will cook faster.

    Since nearly all the radiation from an infrared source (like a toaster or broiler) gets deposited in the first couple millimeters, the energy causes MUCH more damage to the surface of food (i.e. toasting and burning). The interior of the food is cooked via transfer of heat to the interior from the outside.

    Microwave ovens, in most cases, cause less chemical damage to food than conventional ovens.

    And most importantly, ALL cooking methods break chemical bonds in DNA, cell walls, meat fibers, etc. That's what cooking is!"

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • PrettieReptar 2012/02/29 04:51:22 (edited)
    Maybe nuking food and water is a bad idea.
    PrettieReptar
    +1
    I banned the use of a microwave oven in my home along time ago. I don't trust them. My family thinks I'm nuts. They walked into my kitchen and there is sticky note taped over the start button that says "Do not use, silverware inside". Yes, I converted it to my silverware drawer (I did not buy it, it was built in already). I know, the irony. But it serves a good reminder. Ever seen what happens when you nuke silverware? lol
  • Wolfman Prettie... 2012/02/29 08:13:58
    Wolfman
    +1
    Good plan.
  • Prettie... Wolfman 2012/03/01 02:06:21
    PrettieReptar
    +1
    Thanks. Thought you'd appreciate it, specially the humor!
  • Andy Fletcher 2012/02/29 03:08:04
    I don't understand what you're going on about, Wolfman.
    Andy Fletcher
    +1
    Keep drinking the kool-aid folks. LOOK at the the stupid pictures of the plants. If you know anything about plants, especially in containers, it's quite obvious why one died and the other didn't. Here's a hint...There is a marked difference between the two test objects that indicates quite clearly the controls for the test were at best lacking, if not intentionally designed to facilitate a predetermined conclusion.
  • Wolfman Andy Fl... 2012/02/29 05:57:48
    Wolfman
    +1
    Thank you for your opinion. Did you catch the part where all the other kids tried it and got the same results?
  • Andy Fl... Wolfman 2012/02/29 06:08:36
    Andy Fletcher
    +1
    Yes I did. Did you catch that they didn't SHOW the other kids' documentation? Did you note the actual symptoms the failing plant showed? Did you notice ANY glaring differences between the two test subjects? There is a major difference between the two and it eaxactly matches the symptoms of the failing plant. The same thing will indeed kill people as well. Much quicker than cancer though.
  • Wolfman Andy Fl... 2012/02/29 08:15:47
    Wolfman
    I don't follow you. The plants were identical when they started.
  • Andy Fl... Wolfman 2012/02/29 14:02:58
    Andy Fletcher
    Ok I was just giving you a chance to discover it on your own. I can tell you for certain that plant didn't die from the type of water, it died from the amount. That plant drowned. Look carefully at the planting medium and you will see one has a small amount of moisture and the other is soaked. This is actually a very common occurance.
  • Wolfman Andy Fl... 2012/02/29 20:14:47
    Wolfman
    You can tell this from the picture? And all the other kids over-watered their microwave-plant, too. Amazing.
  • Andy Fl... Wolfman 2012/02/29 21:18:31
    Andy Fletcher
    Don't know what the other kids did. But yes, looking at those pictures I can CLEARLY see it was overwatered.Do they show the other kids' plants anywhere, or do we only get to see the singular example? As someone else said, it's junk science. The experiment was designed to produce the desired outcome. That is the only reason for one to appear to have been watered properly, and the other over watered. If you take off the blinders and open up your mind to the possibility of this being bogus, then re look at the pics with a discerning eye, it is obvious.

    Honestly, my first thought was that nuking the water likely concentrated the salts, etc, in the water. Then I actually read the article and found they filtered the water. Well, filtering also brings problems in using it to water plants as it takes out much of what they need. That may have contributed as well, but it is more than obvious the plant drowned. Try taking the pics with out the article to a nursery or shop that specializes in house plants and ask simply "Do you see any reason why one of these plants died and the other did not?". For that matter, just look up the symptoms for overwatered house plants.
  • Wolfman Andy Fl... 2012/03/01 00:08:53
    Wolfman
    Why wasn't the other one over-watered? Why would the kids lie?
  • Andy Fl... Wolfman 2012/03/01 01:04:01
    Andy Fletcher
    Not saying they lied. I'm not going to talk to you about this anymore because you seem to refuse to look at the pics with an objective eye. I'm telling you there is an obvious problem with "science", that it is evident and visible, and the best you can come up with is "Why wasn't the other one over-watered?". There are only two answers for that.

    1. There were no controls set for the experiment.
    ie: exact same soil, exact same amount of water applied to each, etc

    OR

    2. The experiment was designed to produce a predetermined result.

    Again, if you look at the pot with the dying plant, you will see that all along the soil is darker and soggy. How you can not see that is beyond me.

    Go ahead and have the last word if it suits you. I'm done.
  • Wolfman Andy Fl... 2012/03/01 04:26:46
    Wolfman
    It was a kid's experiment in a UK school. The other kids got the same result. I think you are reaching a bit declaring that one plant was overwatered but the other one wasn't. It wasn't an experiment worthy to be certified by the National Labortories but it wasn't so unworthy that it should be dismissed.
  • chaoskitty123 2012/02/29 02:46:44
    Maybe nuking food and water is a bad idea.
    chaoskitty123
    +1
    Maybe it is a bad idea but let's make a comparison.

    The Southern diet once consisted of heavily cooking food in lard. We were told how bad the diet was for us so that many in the South began turning against the Southern diet and higher mortality resulted. It turned out that Southerners had acclimated to their diet and the source of their dietary habits were from European and African origins in relation to race where the diet was what they called a "poverty diet'. Germans, for instance, eat a lot of sausages and the French eat a horrendous mix of foods. Each culture adapted to their diets and thus, regardless of what we may find bad about them, their bodies had inherited a tolerance for certain foods and an intolerance for other foods which may be dubbed "healthier" by people outside of a certain cultural region.

    The French diet is a key indicator as the French tend to eat their food with a glass of wine and drink around a glass of wine a day. Most of you know that in the US, this practice was stopped long ago and that beer outweighs wine in most areas. Even the practice in churches of giving a small cup of wine to congregation members ceased due to people warning us how bad alcohol was.

    The problem was that wine / beer isn't bad for us at all. It is in introducing alcohol...

























    Maybe it is a bad idea but let's make a comparison.

    The Southern diet once consisted of heavily cooking food in lard. We were told how bad the diet was for us so that many in the South began turning against the Southern diet and higher mortality resulted. It turned out that Southerners had acclimated to their diet and the source of their dietary habits were from European and African origins in relation to race where the diet was what they called a "poverty diet'. Germans, for instance, eat a lot of sausages and the French eat a horrendous mix of foods. Each culture adapted to their diets and thus, regardless of what we may find bad about them, their bodies had inherited a tolerance for certain foods and an intolerance for other foods which may be dubbed "healthier" by people outside of a certain cultural region.

    The French diet is a key indicator as the French tend to eat their food with a glass of wine and drink around a glass of wine a day. Most of you know that in the US, this practice was stopped long ago and that beer outweighs wine in most areas. Even the practice in churches of giving a small cup of wine to congregation members ceased due to people warning us how bad alcohol was.

    The problem was that wine / beer isn't bad for us at all. It is in introducing alcohol into cultures which don't drink alcohol on a regular basis, or people into a culture not used to this, alcoholism becomes a problem. Alcoholism has since been determined to be an issue more of social behavior than anything else and not a result of alcohol addiction in and of itself. People drink due to depression seeking out the effects that dull their pain or maybe allow them to enjoy life a bit more by alleviating their stresses and problems. Thus, someone not used to drinking a glass of wine each day would be more likely to succumb to the addictive properties because their bodies aren't used to this and their minds are more directly affected by the effects.

    Thus, imagine a mix of cultures in the US like we once had where cultures which did not drink a glass of wine as habit but drank more to get drunk or don't drink any alcohol at all.

    When I was a kid, pinto beans and corn bread were a staple of the Southern diet... today, it's pizza and hamburgers one might say. The Southern diet has been hit hard by health food and our bodies paid a price as many actually became unhealthy as a result just as junk food did a whammy on us... for the same reason, it changed our dietary habits radically and even now, eating cornbread and pinto beans is still healthier for most Southerners than what we eat now.

    People trying to say microwaving food is bad for us need to look at the fact that many things we eat, that are nuked, are bad for us because it was bad from the start.

    It's also like telling people cannibalism is bad because it passes human disease from the food to the people eating it... and yet, many cultures did it for thousands of years for various reasons with no ill effect for the most part.

    You might say bad example with the cannibalism point but the issue is to point out that the most "obvious" health concerns can be wrong but that there are reasons to have them.

    Cornbread and many Southern foods are actually healthy for almost anyone... it's how they were prepared that made the difference. But in the process of attacking the Southern diet, dietitians actually attacked the food itself. Even the soul foods eaten by black Americans came under fire when these were the ultimate in poverty foods as these were often the parts white people wouldn't eat. However, black Americans had adjusted to it as did whites and Native Americans who ate these foods as well.

    Then, look at all the modifications we make to our food itself before we even eat it... begs the question if eating rocks and dirt might be healthier.

    I eat microwaved food all the time and I don't think it's dangerous because something else the studies you present didn't mention is that if we were eating this much food that our bodies couldn't digest... it wouldn't be storing it as fat but pushing it through our systems for the toilets to deal with.

    Ultimately, grilling food is possibly the best way to eat and there are warnings about it as carcinogens from fats and other things get on our food and make it more likely to cause cancer even if it makes it safer by removing more fats.

    So the best information would be to learn multiple ways to prepare food and then do each in moderation. Eat home grown food instead of genetically altered. Eat foods your ancestors ate in order to stay fine tuned to your biological inheritance. Find ways to make eating healthier meet your needs rather than it changing what you eat where traditional foods are concerned.

    If you fear using a microwave... then find other ways to prepare your food. The worst that can happen is you learn your fears were unjustified or maybe they were but many people you know may have suffered because they didn't listen.

    What does it hurt to go back to traditional ways of cooking? Cook outside on a grill and invite the neighbors over cooking what you can there and cooking the rest indoors on a stove.

    Microwaves are meant for speed cooking and making it unnecessary to know how to cook so that without electricity to cook with, most people can't prepare food for themselves... that should be the focus to get people back to basics.
    (more)
  • Wolfman chaoski... 2012/02/29 06:03:12
    Wolfman
    Paula Dean has contracted diabetes and will modify her Southern recipes.
  • Rabbit 2012/02/29 01:26:37
  • Wolfman Rabbit 2012/02/29 06:04:10
    Wolfman
    +1
    The article states that the water was allowed to cool.
  • Rabbit Wolfman 2012/02/29 07:59:18
    Rabbit
    +1
    Thanks, must have missed that. I'm trying to faze out the micro.
  • Wolfman Rabbit 2012/02/29 08:13:19
    Wolfman
    +1
    Me too.
  • Rabbit Wolfman 2012/02/29 09:14:07
    Rabbit
    +1
    Good idea...Still going to do the creepiing Charlie experiment. just for curiousity sake. I'll let you know how it turns out.
  • Wolfman Rabbit 2012/02/29 09:17:20
    Wolfman
    +1
    good on ya!
  • Mother nature is biased 2012/02/28 23:35:49 (edited)
    I don't understand what you're going on about, Wolfman.
    Mother nature is biased
    +2
    You appear to be American so I'll give you a link to one of your own government agencies.



    http://www.fsis.usda.gov/fact...


    Microwaves don't generate radioactive waves. They use electro-magnetic waves and are completely harmless.
  • Wolfman Mother ... 2012/02/29 06:10:37
    Wolfman
    Of course they are. Nuclear weapons also emit electromagnetic waves. They waves are not harmless at all unless they are contained, as in a microwave oven. Uncontained, the microwaves would cook you like any other piece of meat. But that wasn't the point of the article.

    Read the article again. It explains that the microwaves break down food and water into non-food and non-water. That is the warning.
  • Mother ... Wolfman 2012/03/07 04:03:51
    Mother nature is biased
    Nevermind, I forgot some people are impervious to fact and scientific evidence.
  • Wolfman Mother ... 2012/03/07 05:30:54
    Wolfman
    I've noticed that.
  • CMackley ~POTL~PWCM~JLA 2012/02/28 23:13:07
    I don't care. It's just too damn convenient.
    CMackley ~POTL~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    Everything is heated by agitating molecules. Whether it's inside-out or out-side in makes no difference. What I won't do is use any plastics in a microwave.
  • Wolfman CMackle... 2012/02/29 06:13:49
    Wolfman
    +1
    Conventional heating does not agitate molecules anywhere near microwave frequencies. The two cooking methods are not comparable.
  • Louisa - Enemy of the State 2012/02/28 22:45:48
    I don't care. It's just too damn convenient.
    Louisa - Enemy of the State
    +1
    What's the difference! I just left a website that told me that the Vitamin D my doctor prescribes is increasing my risk of death. Now I'm being nuked. But you know, I ALWAYS intuitively knew that microwaves were not a cooks best friend.
  • Wolfman Louisa ... 2012/02/28 23:14:12
    Wolfman
    +1
    They turn food into something else. Thank you.
  • CMackle... Wolfman 2012/02/29 19:29:56
    CMackley ~POTL~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    The things I nuke (hot dogs, hot pockets, tortillas, coffee, etc.) have no nutritional value anyway. LOL.
  • CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY 2012/02/28 22:11:55
    I don't care. It's just too damn convenient.
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    +2
    Thanks for the article Wolfman. We appreciate your efforts.

    BUT I'm too frigging old to go w/o my microwave. My wife and I had the same microwave for almost 25 years and one day it finally died. It was like losing a member of the family.

    If I paid attention to all the warnings science has tried to convey to us over the years I'd either be an alcoholic, a wife-beater or a total nervous wreck (a combination of all three qualifies one to be a registered Progressive). None of which I am thank Gawd.
  • Wolfman CUDDLY ... 2012/02/28 23:17:28
    Wolfman
    +1
    Maybe the longevity of the magnetron in your microwave is a message. The average lifetime for a magnetron is about 8-years.
  • CUDDLY ... Wolfman 2012/02/28 23:43:40
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    +1
    It was an early model, SHARP, full-size. That sucker lasted a long, long time.
  • Just Another Girl (5) 2012/02/28 22:00:44
    I don't care. It's just too damn convenient.
    Just Another Girl (5)
    +1
    I like my Microwave, it heats my coffee super fast. It makes yummy Hot Pockets and it is super fast.
  • Wolfman Just An... 2012/02/28 23:19:22
    Wolfman
    Did you see the plant die when watered with microwaved water? (link) Have another cup of Joe.
  • Just An... Wolfman 2012/02/28 23:27:55
    Just Another Girl (5)
    No... I usually don't click the links. I like my computer virus free and I trust very very few links.

    And I will... Enjoying a cup right now. Have used a microwave for years and years and it hasn't killed me yet. I think I'm good :-)
  • Wolfman Just An... 2012/02/29 06:15:10
    Wolfman
    It's not water anymore. Enjoy.
  • Prime Time Lime 2012/02/28 22:00:23 (edited)
    Maybe nuking food and water is a bad idea.
    Prime Time Lime
    +2
    I have not gone near a microwave oven in decades and will not allow one in my house.I knew the health dangers years ago.A prominent Swiss scientist under strict lab conditions made many tests on microwave ovens and had found they are unsafe for daily use.
  • JessyBear Prime T... 2012/02/28 22:41:39
    JessyBear
    +2
    If it's the one I found, the had a gag order on him that was lifted in 1998 or so. Funny, I don't know for sure either way, but after looking around - I do know that there has not been enough testing to prove it safe. Maybe it's like smokes... They just don't want to know.
  • Prime T... JessyBear 2012/02/28 22:50:00
    Prime Time Lime
    +2
    I am not sure if this is the person you are talking about. When I am in doubt about a product and have seen enough scientific evidence ,I stay as far away from that product as I can. Microwave ovens are one product I will not use.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/07/23 22:23:04

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals