[extropy-chat] (health) risks and benefits along a bell curve ?

[Ensel Sharon]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Robert Bradbury wrote:

> >From a physics perspective you should be worried a lot more about how many
> X-rays you receive over your lifetime, or how much UV radiation you receive
> or how much radon is in your basement.  Cell phone radiation is in the


Right - honestly, I am not concerned about cell phone radiation, or WiFi
or any of that.  What I am saying is that the _reason_ I am not concerned
is my common sense conclusion that:  If I don't see at least a few people
(read: the beginning of the bell curve) dying very soon from cell phones,
then presumably the effect is negligible.  If practice XYZ really was
significantly harmful, I would at least see the statistical outlyers
kicking the bucket already ...

My question is, from a learned medical standpoint, is this sound reasoning
?  Why _wouldn't_ this be a true statement ?

And then the next question, if it is indeed reasonable, is:

Can I apply the same bell-curve / statistical outlyer common sense to
positive health benefits, like eating a lot of berries and taking a lot of
anti-oxidants ... namely: If I don't see at least a few people that become
dramatically healthier and live dramatically longer because of these
practices, then probably the effect is negligible.  If practice XYZ really
was significantly healthful, I would at least see the statistical outlyers
living to be 150 (and since the prescription is for things like green tea
and cocoa and fruits and fiber, we would have seen them throughout
history)

So ... ?