In 2006, a paper published in the British Journal of Radiobiology, titled "Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme," revealed the type of radiation used in x-ray-based breast screenings is much more carcinogenic than previously believed:
Recent radiobiological studies have provided compelling evidence that the low energy X-rays as used in mammography are approximately four times - but possibly as much as six times - more effective in causing mutational damage than higher energy X-rays. Since current radiation risk estimates are based on the effects of high energy gamma radiation, this implies that the risks of radiation-induced breast cancers for mammography X-rays are underestimated by the same factor.[1]In other words, the radiation risk model used to determine whether the benefit of breast screenings in asymptomatic women outweighs their harm, underestimates the risk of mammography-induced breast and related cancers by between 4-600%.












Comment: Yes, we have been flooded with these "Scientific studies" and their inconclusive findings, made or sponsored by the industry which profits from this harmful pulse, and they are well aware of what they are doing:
Wireless Industry's Patented System to Reduce Cancer Risk from Wireless Local Networks Never Adopted
See also:
If WiFi and cell phone radiation are safe, why has Belgium's telecomm boss banned them from his offices?
Electromagnetic radiation and its effect on the brain: an insider speaks out
Radiation From Cell Phones and WiFi Are Making People Sick -- Are We All at Risk?