https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2025/06/08/2003838226
It’s in response to articles such as https://www.news-medical.net/news/20250926/Solar-storms-linked-to-increased-heart-attack-risk-in-women.aspx which try to link fluctuations in Earth’s magnetic field during geomagnetic storms to negative health effects, such as heart attacks, strokes, mental illness, seizures, and many more.
I only know high school science.
There are 2 professors from reputable unis saying no, the WHO saying no, and US National Academy of Sciences saying no.
Anyone saying yes space weather effects humans is a fraud.
Actual studies that claim space weather effects people have been debunked by one of those professors and their students.
not really, because it doesn’t cite any sources. but the article itself isn’t open access so it’s also hard to verify that it’s got anything to disprove to begin with.
use of deprecated units like the gauss also makes it look weird.
See that word “Editorials” in the link. That’s a dead give-away it’s not really a good source. While it’s a decent breakdown of the facts, the article doesn’t cite sources for its claims. As a statement of a position, its fine. It’s not evidence though, and evidence is what you need to debunk something. Experimental data, analysis, meta-analysis, something that you can point at that anyone with the right tools and resources can duplicate independently and get the same results, as well as a clear description of your reasoning for how it proves what you say it proves. That’s evidence.
The conclusion is correct, but it doesn’t show how someone can know that for sure. An opinion, by itself, doesn’t disprove anything. It amounts to “Trust me bro” which can be rhetorically compelling, but isn’t the same thing as being objectively correct.
