Sentences with phrase «dangerous effects on human»

Please do not believe those who promote drinking coffee to prevent AD (even if there is some truth in it) because caffeine in coffee and other products is a poison and leads to many dangerous effects on human organism including brain and nervous system:

Many more further detailed the destruction being wrought on the environment by industrial livestock farming and the dangerous effects on human health of eating too much meat.

Not exact matches

While not a lot of research can tell us the effects of BPA on humans, studies on animals suggest it may be dangerous to brain development, the reproductive system, and the immune system.

Aside from well - established things like rabies virus, SARS coronavirus (the virus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome) and Marburg virus (an extremely dangerous but rare hemorrhagic fever pathogen), bats appear to carry a plethora of other germs with unclear effects on human health, if any.

With rudimentary laboratories, one could argue that more was accomplished with regards to the effect of diet on cancer in the former half of the century, as revolutionary researchers like Tannenbaum, Rous, and their colleagues provided us with dozens of animal studies linking diet and cancer by exposing mice to free radical - laden vegetable oils.32, 33 Several decades later, two other researchers, Dayton and Pearce, provided one of the few studies revealing what happens when we give humans vegetable oils and their accompanying free radicals when they randomized men to a corn oil solution and a similar rise in cancer followed.34 It is no surprise that corn oil is often used in animal studies to cause cancer, as the ingestion of damaging free radicals predictably hastens cancer development.35 Furthermore, these scientists were the first to show that fasting, restricting calories, and cutting carbohydrates could lower the chance of cancer in animals exposed to dangerous chemicals and carcinogens.

That is decidedly not how this paper is used in public discourse though, I think in many instances this paper is used to say that not only do humans cause global warming, but they are also the major cause and the degree of effect on nature / climate is in some way dangerous and needs to be mitigated.

Initially, PED showed backbone, standing up to political activists pushing the state to adopt the Next Generation Science Standards view of climate change, which promotes the false claims that the science on climate change is settled, that we know human activities are driving dangerous climate change, that carbon dioxide is a pollutant that's dangerous to human health and the environment, and that we fully understand how to counteract the effects of climate change or control long - term global temperature.

It is recognised and accepted that infrasound is dangerous to human health in other situations it is only a matter of time before full disclosure of the extent of the effects on human health of Industrial Wind Turbines is accepted by medical authorities.

Then there are the lukewarmers: these are people that say that, well, it may well be that humans are having a significant effect on climate but it's not dangerous.

Although a limited range of positive effects of global warming on humans have been identified, the overwhelming majority of effects are increasingly dangerous.

And it's pretty clear why: in addition to driving dangerous climate disruption, these coal plants are having enormous effects on human health.

Whereas the reports of the United Nations» Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warn of a dangerous human effect on climate, NIPCC concludes the human effect is likely to be small relative to natural variability, and whatever small warming is likely to occur will produce benefits as well as costs.

Even in the best - case scenario, the one seized upon by Gardner in Brown, in which humans turn out to have the least possible effect on the climate, we'll still only be able to avoid the most dangerous effects of warming if our extremely good luck is coupled with aggressive steps taken to reduce emissions.

And if we don't take urgent action NOW to quickly end our GHG emissions and draw down the already dangerous anthropogenic excess CO2, then AGW is likely to have horrific effects on the entire biosphere that will go far beyond merely ending human civilization.

University of Utah psychology professor David Strayer — who as a psychologist should already know people are dangerous even just going to the bathroom — conducted research into effects of mental distractions on the human ability to drive safely.

Comments from the floor ranged from defensive (the APA staff essentially said, «If we want to be a player here with psychiatry we need to get these guidelines out now»; representatives from division 39, psychoanalysis, claimed unfair treatment of psychoanalysis and psychodynamic TX,) to accurate (the president of the Women's division strongly suggested that decontextualizing PTSD was dangerous to those who suffered from it,) to the idiotic (sorry about casting aspersions here — but I am always fascinated when psychologists in love with RCTs and meta - analyses as the only viable evidence base stand at the mic and spout effect sizes etc. — overlooking the important contributions from qualitative research, and misunderstanding how RCTs are based on drug trials that simply do not translate to humans.