Debunked: The Dangers of Microwave Ovens

Greylandra

Active Member
http://www.google.ca/url?q=http://m...IICzAA&usg=AFQjCNG4g52YyZB-m57nLBltNzCeWTI8cQ I think superheated water is is a remote but plausible risk of microwave oven use. Even with mineral/tap water. Reheated enough times past the boiling point should allow impurities to form a precipitate collecting along the top of a container while the level of water goes down with the evaporation due to boiling thereby purifying what remains to the point where super heating becomes possible.
 

Ronnie

New Member
Any debunker should know that absence of verified data, though important to point out, does not mean the claim is not true. It is curious that there are apparently NO studies presented on this issue that does any similar sort of testing that proves microwave cooking has no observable harmful effects. That peculiarity in itself needs to be reconciled. Any articles I have found debunking the claimed harm of microwaves, state "there are no valid studies that verify this" but none state any studies that actually tested for biological/nutritional effects and found no change to a person's biology. Effects do not have to be immediately obvious in order to be significant. As an example, hydrogenated oils (which is created by man-made food processing) doesn't immediately kill me but it has a significantly different effect over eating the natural fat in avocados. It has gone from being "recognized as safe" (even "healthy") to NOT being safe. There are numerous ailments for which science HAS NO CLUE as to what causes them and so I would not rule out electromagnetic effects on food and humans until there is actual proof. Please cite if you know of any studies testing for biological/nutritional or bodily changes (or lack thereof) caused by microwave cooking. I'd like to try to settle this matter without opinion and here say.
 
Last edited:

Geoffrey

New Member
http://www.google.ca/url?q=http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1_OXM4mr_i0&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwik1sbY9IvMAhVQ3GMKHZaeDW8QtwIICzAA&usg=AFQjCNG4g52YyZB-m57nLBltNzCeWTI8cQ I think superheated water is is a remote but plausible risk of microwave oven use. Even with mineral/tap water. Reheated enough times past the boiling point should allow impurities to form a precipitate collecting along the top of a container while the level of water goes down with the evaporation due to boiling thereby purifying what remains to the point where super heating becomes possible.[/QUOT
I don't think they have suet pudding in the US :)

It's probably the microwave rendering the fat into tallow as it reaches a higher internal temperature. This will then set more solidly than regular suet which contains organic material.

Debunked!
America does have suet pudding.
https://www.google.com/search?sourc...t2CepVmJU#scso=uid_UZVzWqKhIK-AtgWa3IPQAQ_1:0
 

Dan Wilson

Senior Member.
Any debunker should know that absence of verified data, though important to point out, does not mean the claim is not true.

A lot of the microwave claims presented here can be debunked with basic science. First, we know that microwaves, unlike ultraviolet and x-rays, are not within the range necessary to break DNA bonds. Microwaves are too weak.


Second, microwaves work by bombarding food with waves that cause molecules to vibrate and create friction, thus generating heat. Microwave cooking can be compared to simply heating food. We know that when it comes to health, heating food is, depending on the food, either necessary, good, or neutral. There are studies that look at the nutritional effects that a variety of cooking methods might have on food, including microwaves.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5501645/pdf/pone.0180993.pdf
Although significant changes were observed in the proximate composition, the nutritional quality of cooked fillets was not affected compared to the control. Mineral content also remained relatively stable in the different treatments in the two species under study. In general, no drastic changes were noted in the fatty acid profile during the cooking process for which, independently of the type of process, it is sufficient to consume small portions (50 to 75 g) of either salmon or Chilean jack mackerel to cover the daily intake recommended by the FAO/WHO for omega-3 fatty acids.
Content from External Source
Vitamin C is probably the best example of a nutrient being lost to cooking but this is not unique to microwaves and if people aren't consuming enough vitamin C that is a separate problem.

Effects do not have to be immediately obvious in order to be significant.
You could say this for literally anything. These ideas should not be dismissed but in order to take them seriously there needs to be some precedence for it. Since we know that microwaves are harmless to our DNA, we know how it cooks food, and we know that cooking food is almost always a good thing, what would even be the proposed mechanism as to how a microwave can harm you either directly or indirectly? Combine this with the fact that microwave users have never been reported to be more unhealthy than comparable non-microwave users and we have no reason to suggest that they may be harmful.

As an example, hydrogenated oils (which is created by man-made food processing) doesn't immediately kill me but it has a significantly different effect over eating the natural fat in avocados.
Also, this is only true if you eat too much hydrogenated oil and the oils in things like avocados have different chemistry.
 
Top