ionizing

Although much of the ultraviolet spectrum is non-ionizing, some of it is not, and a small portion of the heat from the sun is ionizing radiation.

Minor point: The way that these high energy particles 'pop' out an atom is by ionizing it.

> which can put out a very harmful amount of ionizing radiation It's not ionizing radiation any more than wifi is.

It's fine to not know the difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation but please don't give health advice based on that misunderstanding, you sound like an anti-vaccine activist.

The sort of electromagnetic radiation that strips electrons and breaks covalent bonds is called ionizing radiation; ionizing radiation only occurs above a certain frequency threshold (depending on the material being ionized).

Usually the culprit for lots of false alarms is an ionizing in the kitchen and poor placement.

The article implies that cancer studies that consider anything other than ionizing radiation are a waste of time and money.

However, microwave radiation -- the 2.4 ghz part of the electromagnetic spectrum -- is pretty safely in the non-ionizing range.

One thing that probably confuses many is the mechanism by which ionizing radiation causes cancer.

Non-ionizing radiation inducing currents would not break bonds--it would just interfere with repairing bonds that were broken by some other mechanism.

Ultraviolet is usually considered to be the low end of the ionizing radiation range.

The ionizing radiation thing is a goofy UFOs-are-space-travellers thing, where the UFO sprays ionizing radiation in front of itself, which heats and disperses the air in front of it, allowing the UFO to travel faster.

> And when you think of it, the "conventional" techniques mean that seeds (etc) are exposed to ionizing radiation, carsinogenic chemicals and whatever.

If your immediate response is something about "non-ionizing" then you know nothing about the many animal experiments that demonstrate behavior and biological effects from magnetic fields and EM exposure.

But the scientific consensus is: “Consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.” And when you think of it, the "conventional" techniques mean that seeds (etc) are exposed to ionizing radiation, carsinogenic chemicals and whatever.

Ionizing radiation, on the other hand, has a small chance of popping an atom out of a molecule in your body.