Newsletter (23 February 2004)

EMF: The Corporations' Spades of Ace

Corporations' spades of Ace: see what Paul Brodeur already then (in 1993 ! ) wrote in his book,...including some other excerpts from Bridlewood EMFs Information Service.

Hans Karow

http://www.feb.se/Bridlewood/HEALTH.HTM (excerpt)

The utility industry's latest strategy is to argue that we cannot prove that there is a health risk from electromagnetic fields until we know exactly how magnetic fields cause cancer, leukemia or other diseases. This is a false argument as Paul Brodeur clearly points out in his 1993 book The Great Power-Line Cover-Up. He states:

"What industry spokespeople conveniently overlooked, of course, was that thirty years after definitive epidemiology had been conducted to show that asbestos was a potent cancer-producing agent, scientists still do not know the mechanism by which an inhaled asbestos fibre reacts in lung tissue to cause cancer. Nor do they understand the mechanism by which cigarette smoke reacts in lung tissue to cause cancer. Or how the chemical pesticide DDT operates in breast tissue to cause breast cancer. Suffice it to say, if public health authorities had been required to wait for the cancer-producing mechanisms of these agents to be fully understood, regulations governing asbestos exposure would not have been implemented; warnings on cigarette smoking would not have been issued; and the twenty-year old ban on DDT would not have been imposed."

Of the EPA report, Time magazine reported, on July 30, 1990, that Louis Slesin of Microwave News, has printed what may be his greatest scoop: the key paragraph of a two-year Environmental Protection Agency study recommending that so-called extremely low-frequency fields be classified as "probable human carcinogens" alongside such notorious chemical toxins as PCBs, formaldehyde and dioxin. The recommendation, which could have set off a costly chain of regulatory actions, was deleted from the final draft after review by the White House Office of Policy Development. "The EPA thing is a stunner," says Paul Brodeur, a writer for the New Yorker. "It's a clear case of suppression and politicization of a major health issue by the White House."

Paul Brodeur wrote of the EPA report in the New Yorker: "In spite of the deletion, the summary-and-conclusions section of the draft EPA report contained a persuasive indictment of power-line magnetic fields as a cancer-producing agent. Its authors stated that five of the six case-control studies published in the peer- reviewed medical literature showed that children who lived near power lines giving off strong magnetic fields were developing cancer more readily than children who did not live near power lines."

Martin Halper, a director of the EPA, said in a December 1990 Fortune magazine article: "In all my years of looking at chemicals, I have never seen a set of epidemiological studies that remotely approached the weight of evidence that we're seeing with ELF electromagnetic fields. Clearly there is something here."

The latest official recognition of the health risk comes in a leaked United States National Council on Radiation Protection report funded by the Environmental Protection Agency and written by eleven leading American experts in EMFs. Bob Edwards, in the October 7, 1995 issue of New Scientist, writes that the report recommends an EMF safety limit of 2 mG (0.2 microteslas). He writes:

"EPA officials say the report is the most comprehensive study ever on the health effects of low-frequency EMFs. Its findings represent a fundamental challenge to the electricity industry. The authors say that their recommendations, if accepted, could force `complex and costly' changes in society`s use of electricity.

"The report recommends that future developments adopt a safety limit of 0.2 microteslas. This is a very weak magnetic field, and stronger fields are common around electricity pylons and close to electrical appliances. New nurseries, schools and houses should not be built where EMF exposures breach that guideline, says the report, and power lines should be kept away from residential areas. Offices should be designed to keep workers' exposure from computers, photocopiers and printers below 0.2 microteslas."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Irish Border and the politics of mast health issues

Best,  Imelda, Cork, Ireland

" MAST PROMPTS RADIATION FEARS

Fears over radiation emissions have prompted Brian Cowen, [Irish] minister for foreign affairs, to demand an environmental impact statement from the British government for a communications mast erected near a village in South Armagh, writes Richard Oakley.

The construction at the British Army base in Forkhill has angered local residents who believe radiation from it poses a health risk. They also claim that the mast allows for security surveillance in parts of Louth. The British government denies it poses any risk.

A spokesman for Cowen said last week that he was informed about the mast in June last year and he raised the matter with the British government, notably Paul Murphy, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. The British government told the minister the mast was intended to replace two older ones at the base and to improve local communications for the police, army and emergency services in the area.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Abuse of power?

Concerning this report of a new emission power study: Why was such a "study" done? Unless the masts were malfunctioning, then spending time, effort, and journal pages has no meaning and adds nothing to the body of knowledge. The power of such masts at any distance easily can be CALCULATED within a factor of two or so. So, why make work by sending out people to do measurements?

Would Sianette perhaps please explain?

Perhaps the Andersen or Pedersen researchers did not understand the inverse-square law or antenna patterns?

The issue is not the power, frequency, or other parameters of the radiation. It is whether the ICNIRP or other permissible exposure levels are correct or not.  In my opinion, they are not, and I don't offhand know how they should be corrected.

The recent studies by Lu et al (1999), Salford et al (2003), dePomerai et al (2002), and Zwamborn et al (2003), alone, show that the permissible exposure levels of ICNIRP or FCC (in the USA) must be at least two orders of magnitude too high for some kinds of digital transmitters and may be misrepresented entirely by the frequency parameter usually used to determine exposures. These exposure levels were set years ago under conditions very different from the digital microwave circumstances of the present. There is too much inertia in rejection of thermal effects and acceptance of the increased efficiency of digital communication protocols.

The emissions of these masts are well understood, and there is no reason to measure them unless some malfunction is suspected.

What is not well understood is the effect of such emissions on human beings, except that permissible emissions don't cause much heating up of living tissue.

It seems to me that the issues are not being represented accurately to government officials; or, possibly, that these officials are uncaring or corrupt. Or, of course, all three.

I should add, that I don't have much doubt of the safety of 50 or 60 Hz power lines--except that perhaps sometimes these lines might conduct microwaves from cell phones or cell masts and reradiate them in a harmful way.

I recommend on revising the microwave standards first; once microwave effects are well understood and can be subtracted away from the problem, the power lines might be revisited. But, at this point, I think power distribution lines are a red herring, disruptive to the chase.

John Michael Williams

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war

· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years

· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

see under: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html

Informant: George Paxinos

and

RECENT NHNE GLOBAL WARMING POSTS:

UNSUPPORTIVE ATTITUDES MAKES CLIMATE RESEARCH IN U.S. DIFFICULT (2/21/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6798

GLOBAL WARMING TO SQUEEZE WESTERN MOUNTAINS DRY BY 2050 (2/21/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6797

SCIENTISTS SAY ADMINISTRATION DISTORTS FACTS (2/19/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6777

HOW GLOBAL WARMING MAY CAUSE THE NEXT ICE AGE (2/1/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6688

U.S. MILITARY CONSIDERS DRAMATIC GLOBAL WARMING SCENARIOS (1/29/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6672

NEW STUDY: UK HEADED FOR NEW ICE AGE 'WITHIN DECADES' (1/29/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6673

ALARMING OVERVIEW OF WORLD'S MELTING GLACIERS & SEA ICE (1/24/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6660

TRANSCRIPT: AL GORE ON GLOBAL WARMING AND THE ENVIRONMENT (1/15/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6607

GLOBAL WATER SHORTAGE THREATENS FOOD SUPPLY (1/10/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6574

GLOBAL WARMING GREATER THREAT THAN TERRORISM (1/10/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6573

CLIMATE CHANGE: ONE MILLION SPECIES THREATENED WITH EXTINCTION (1/7/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6553

NEW STUDY: LARGE-SCALE SALINITY CHANGES IN THE OCEANS (1/6/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6544

OCEAN LIFE DEPENDS ON SINGLE CIRCULATION PATTERN (1/3/2004):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6531

EUROPE SHOWS HOW GLOBAL WARMING IS TRANSFORMING OUR WORLD (12/8/2003):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6388

MELTING ICE 'WILL SWAMP CAPITALS' (12/7/2003):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhnenews/message/6382

Informant: Peter Drekmeier

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rachel's #785: Arsenic-Treated Wood, Pt. 2

http://tinyurl.com/ys5j7