/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12163135
And lastly, here's the clearest and most concise way to wrap this whole thing up. Here's what you do. Read a very large quantity of the experimental data produce on this topic, try to reconcile the positive and negative results, and see what mechanisms YOU can come up with to explain these effects.

>>12163185
>so I can't even figure out what study he is referencing.
Image.

> I am sorry if I don't buy the idea that cells are communicating with each other in the radio spectrum.
How convenient. You can just walk into something and decide you know what is and isn't true. Nature itself bends to your whims. Must be nice. Why don't you write a paper on this? It should be easy. Go through the pastebin, gather together the relevant literature, and write a review explaining what they were all doing wrong since the 1950's. You can have this wrapped up in, what, maybe a week? Send it in to Bioelectromagnetics with a note attached: "Sorry, I think this is the last issue of your journal."

Jokes aside, sure, you don't buy it, you are unconvinced you should bother reading the literature, you think the only possible mechanism is heating. So what?