No Nukes!

January 16, 2007
By Anon E. Mouse

That’s right, the Mouse family has been a nuclear-free zone since…let me see…last Wednesday. The microwave oven went out in a burst of flame and a puff of smoke. Mrs. Mouse, via Consumer Reports, has already selected the new one. At 2.2 cubic feet of capacity, it is large enough to cook Putnam County.

A marathon-shopping trip (aren’t they all), however, revealed that the best place to purchase a replacement was…gasp … online. (Reminds me of National Lampoon’s “Vacation.” I know it isn’t exact and I had to sanitize it, but goes something like…)

Clark: Yo, homes! What it is? Hey, we’re not from around here.
Homeboy: No Shizzle!

So we are waiting for UPS (pronounced “Ooops!”) to deliver the new one. In the meantime, it is a flashback for me. I wanted some lunch yesterday (go figure) and realized that re-heating leftovers would now involve dirtying a dish. It took almost ten minutes to reheat some leftover soup. Not only that, but I had to keep stirring it!
It takes me back a bit. My family was, seriously, the last that I knew of to purchase a microwave. Same goes for VCR and color TV. It was Christmas 1986. Now, I graduated from Ye Olde High School in 1986. I come home from college to find all these new gadgets. I guess that, even with the cost of tuition, it was still cheaper for my folks to have me out of the house. (I guess I did drink a lot of milk back then, after all.)

So, we are heating up our vegetables in a pot on the stove. With two days off school this week, the TV dinners I bought for lunch will have to stay in the freezer and the youngsters will make due with PB&J. My kids are marveling at the smells and ping-ping sounds of popcorn that is being produced in a pan.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

34 Responses to “ No Nukes! ”

  1. Emtronics on January 16, 2007 at 7:13 pm

    UPS is in a deal to buy FedEx and hopefully if all goes well they will merge and be known as FedUps.

  2. Perplexed Peorian on January 16, 2007 at 8:30 pm

    Mrs. Mouse: Sorry to hear that the flaming microwave was replaced. Hazards from microwaves to one’s brain cells from eating zapped food is real and so on down the list … wonder if it may affect mouse brain cells too?

  3. Anon E. Mouse on January 16, 2007 at 8:37 pm

    Perplexed Peorian – please cite your source.

  4. Perplexed Peorian on January 17, 2007 at 6:31 am

    Do a Google Search — ill effects of microwaves — read some articles and draw your own conclusions. Taking in food that has been altered, microwave, even cooking, etc., logically would have some type of effect on our bodies. Human bodies which have a water content in various stated ranges such as 80% or more would seem to be affected. Dr. Emoto has done some interesting work on water, perhaps you would enjoy reading about his work too. https://www.hado.net/

  5. Tony on January 17, 2007 at 8:16 am

    Perplexed:

    Please tell me you did not just type that.

  6. Anon E. Mouse on January 17, 2007 at 8:17 am

    Perplexed:
    I didn’t see anything o that site that seemed relevant.
    However, look here:
    http://www.snopes.com/science/microwave/plants.asp
    All a microwave oven does is excite water molecules. It doesn’t molecularly change anything.

    So, I think your suggestion that microwave ovens are bad is B.S. (Throwing the yellow B.S. flag in your general direction.)

    Also, “search Google” will rarely win you an arguement around here.

  7. Perplexed Peorian on January 17, 2007 at 10:32 am

    Tony and Mouse: So, you intellectually think that you can change the molecular structure of an item by microwaving it and then the altered food that you put into your body does not have any effect on your body?

    By that analysis — would you say that ingesting a sugar laced diet does not affect one’s behavior? You are what you eat…. or doesn’t it matter?

    That is what is great — different points of view.

    So, mouse what was your take on Dr. Emoto’s research?

  8. Perplexed Peorian on January 17, 2007 at 10:33 am

    And Tony: some of that same research that once said eggs and butter where the evil foods of the decade are now promoting that eggs and butter are okay…..

  9. Anon E. Mouse on January 17, 2007 at 11:03 am

    Perplexed peoria sez: “So, you intellectually think that you can change the molecular structure of an item by microwaving it and then the altered food that you put into your body does not have any effect on your body?”

    I sez: I do not believe “that you can change the molecular structure of an item by microwaving it.” Did you check the site I posted? It showed that plants are NOT changed or harmed by microwave water. Read the whole thing.

    Also, I didn’t find anything on the site you posted that was relevant.

  10. Perplexed Peorian on January 17, 2007 at 11:57 am

    Mouse: So, eating raw vegetables is the same as eating cooked vegetables using conventional gas or electric sources? Nutrient levels are different. Would you agree?

    And the chemical stucture of water is not altered by temperature — think steam, water, ice. Would you agree?

    Whatever you put into your body somehow affects your body on a molecular level? Would you agree? Think sugar, corn syrup, tobacco, alcohol, drugs, think anything you ingest, inhale, skin contact or whatever.

    Recent studies and support groups— will look for specfic sources — are discovering that some people with cancer after conventional radiation and chemical treatments are suffering from decreased brain function.

    Your source that the ‘appearance of the plants was virtually the same’ — they all grew.

    We don’t have to agree — it would appear reasonable that there has to be some type of change with adding microwaves to the mix of cooking foods — will look for other source documents that you might accept as ‘validation’.

  11. Anon E. Mouse on January 17, 2007 at 12:50 pm

    OK, Perplexed, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt before, but I now think you must be just plain silly.

    you sez: “eating raw vegetables is the same as eating cooked vegetables using conventional gas or electric sources? Nutrient levels are different. Would you agree?”
    I sez: No, I do not agree. As far as veggies – if you cook a veggie on a stove, it loses nutrient. Where do the nutrients go? Into the water you cooked it in. They are still there, just diluted into the water. They don’t magically change.

    You sez: “And the chemical stucture of water is not altered by temperature — think steam, water, ice. Would you agree?”

    I agree. The “chemical” structure of water – the molecular structure – does not change. As liquid water, a single molecule consists of two atoms of hydrogen (H2) and one atom of oxygen (O). As steam – it is the same. As ice, it is the same. H20 is H20.

    You compare radiation and chemotherapy to microwaves. That’s not apples and oranges that is apples and lug nuts – no where near the same.

    You sez more: “Your source that the ‘appearance of the plants was virtually the same’ — they all grew.”

    I sez: Not just that they grew, but they all grew equally the same. You are trying to tell me that microwaves “change” water. It doesn’t.

    Your arguements are just plain laughable.

  12. Pammy on January 17, 2007 at 12:54 pm

    My advice? Don’t wear your tinfoil hat while microwaving.

  13. Anon on January 17, 2007 at 1:51 pm

    Forget about the tinfoil hat, just take your head out of the microwave before using it!

    Hey, Perplexed, don’t you know the electromagnetic fields around computers causes cancer?! Turn it off! Turn it off! Blogging kills!

  14. Perplexed Peorian on January 17, 2007 at 2:30 pm

    Mouse: Are you implying or telling us that you drink all the water from your boiled vegetables to obtain full nutritional value?

  15. Anon E. Mouse on January 17, 2007 at 2:40 pm

    Are you implying that I eat vegetables?

  16. SA on January 17, 2007 at 3:01 pm

    I don’t expect to convince anyone because I am no authority, and I am not even certain myself, but I have read and heard enough about the dangers of microwave ovens that I stopped using them. The test demonstrating effects on water are by no means too useful. It’s microwave’s effects on foods that concern me. Here’s a lengthy piece on the subject for those who want to read more.

    http://www.mercola.com/article/microwave/hazards.htm

  17. Anon E. Mouse on January 17, 2007 at 4:21 pm

    Another tinfoil hat website.
    Microwaves excite the water within a food. That is it.

  18. Completely Oblivious on January 17, 2007 at 4:48 pm

    Man, I think I’m going to go back to using a magnifying glass to cook my food. I don’t eat much out of the microwave because for the most part, its altered going in and out, how about that? Its the food that is microwaveable that is equally bad if not worse.

  19. Tony on January 17, 2007 at 4:57 pm

    This is well, crazy. A microwave is nothing more than a superdeedooper radio transmitter with little range and ultra-high frequency. If you stand real close to a conventional radio transmitter (of high enough power) it will cook you just like a microwave. Heck, if you grab the antenna on an IL State Police cruiser it could burn you.

    The “radiation” is just that, micro-wave radiation. Its not the kind that you duck and cover from.

    If you are concerned about damage to your food, I suggest you also watch out for computers, cell phones, your garage door opener, the Peoria 911 center, fluorescent lights, and maybe even your Victrola. Add the sun too.

  20. Completely Oblivious on January 17, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    I already live the life of a garden gnome Tony, thanks alot-JK

  21. SA on January 17, 2007 at 6:21 pm

    I think Tony is right without knowing it, except the sun should not be on his list. As long as you don’t stay out too long and get burned, catching some rays is one of the healthiest things you can do for yourself. Sunscreens are questionable.

  22. Mahkno on January 17, 2007 at 7:40 pm

    Ripper:

    And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids.

  23. Tony on January 17, 2007 at 10:52 pm

    SA – Yes I know, I was being sarcastic. See the Victrola comment for further evidence.

    As far as not knowing, think what you want but all you have to do is a little research for yourself to learn what a microwave oven is.

    “Duck! And cover!”

  24. SA on January 18, 2007 at 8:44 am

    I have done a little research and that’s why I don’t use one anymore. What sources do you have? I’d like to learn more, as I would prefer the nuker if I was assured it was safe.

    Feed some facts, man.

  25. Tony on January 18, 2007 at 9:19 am

    How many facts do you want? Anon E Mouse tried, then I chimed in. You could start with wikipedia, the place for all info. I also like http://www.howstuffworks.com.

    BTW, the site you referenced was from a guy who is selling stuff and claiming, basically, that EVERYTHING is bad. Consider your source.

    Officially, the “microwave” range of radio frequencies (electromagnetic radiation) starts at 1 Ghz and goes up to 300 Ghz or so, I think. That means your cordless phone, cell phone, wireless access point and other such devices are radiating you with microwaves all the time. In fact, some things I read state that your cell phone can emit more EMR than your microwave oven does. A microwave oven focuses the microwaves on a central point, which is why they heat better in the center. The other devices I mentioned emit the signal in an omnidirectional pattern.

    The radio waves heat the food by exciting water and fat. The food is cooked, which in some cases does chemically alter it, but only in the same way your stove top does.

    So, my point was, if you are concerned with EMR, you should focus on the devices around you that are CONSTANTLY radiating you, not an appliance that runs for 3 minutes at a time a few times a day.

  26. SA on January 18, 2007 at 1:59 pm

    The safety notice on my new cell phone states it may be dangerous to have it located close to your body due to radiation; it advises a minimum distance of 6/10 inch.

    I agree one has to take claims with a grain of salt (sea salt, not the refined white stuff) when the person making the claim also is selling something. That is always frustrating when trying to determine the truth.

  27. Anon E. Mouse on January 18, 2007 at 9:14 pm

    Yes, of course.
    Sodium Chloride that comes from the ocean is MUCH DIFFERENT than Sodium Chloride that comes out of the mines.

    “Refined” salt – for crying out loud.

  28. Billy Dennis on January 18, 2007 at 9:52 pm

    I think we are all overlooking one of the most dangerous chamical substances known to man: dihydrous oxide. This stuff is DOCUMENTED to have killed thousands, if not millions of people. Yet they let this stuff be shiopped across our highways and on our rails. Our grocery stores sell products that contain this stuff to varying degrees.

  29. Anon E. Mouse on January 18, 2007 at 10:07 pm

    Bill, are you talking about natural dihydrous oxide or the refined stuff?

  30. Tony on January 18, 2007 at 10:18 pm

    Literally millions of gallons of dihyrous oxide run off of our nation’s fields into our waterways every day. It is sad to say the least.

  31. Anon E. Mouse on January 18, 2007 at 10:28 pm

    The stuff has been linked to Global Warming.

  32. Billy Dennis on January 19, 2007 at 12:51 am

    Natural or artificial, the stuff has THE EXACT SAME CHEMICAL FORMULA. I call it “The Molecule of Death.”

  33. PeterPumpkinEater on September 20, 2007 at 6:32 am

    Perplexed Peorian is right on the nose here. Amazing how the idiots he is talking to don’t even realize they are idiots. :)

  34. Anon E. Mouse on September 20, 2007 at 8:48 am

    Let’s see,
    February, March, April-May-June-July – that’s six.
    August and September make eight.
    Eight months ago we settle this argument and it was determined that “Perplexed Peorian” was a silly, tinfoil hat wearing, goofball.

    Mr. PumpkinEater, may I suggest you worry more about meteorites in Peru?