Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
increase the probability of childhood leukemia. Among the many
malignancies of adults and children living near power lines
that they recorded, they reported significant elevations only of
leukemiaamongchildrenwholivedinhousesthatwerecalculated
to have received, on average, more than 1 mG from main power
lines over a long period of time; they found 11 cases where they
expected 4.5 from their control group. But they also measured
the fields from all sources in the houses-though for a brief time-
and found only 5 cases where the measured fields were greater
than 1 mG. They expected 12.5 from their controls. These are
not convincing data. Advocates of the EMF/cancer relationship
advertised that 'calculated' fields cause leukemia. The equally
significant result that 'measured' fields prevent leukemia was not
advertised. Of course, the minute electromagnetic fields—either
calculated ormeasured—neither cause nor prevent cancer.
The Swedish result, accepted as advertised, requires that
magnetic fields from the use of electricity are responsible for
most childhood leukemia. But the leukemia rate of 4 per 100,000
childhood years is the same everywhere in the West—in the
United States and Europe—independent of variations in the use
of electricity. Moreover, in the U.S., the incidence has not changed
significantlyforatleast50years,whileelectricalpowerusagehas
increased more than 20 timesduring that period.
Indeed, a National Research Council, National Academy of
Sciences, review that considered all epidemiological evidence
concludedthat'magneticfieldsmeasuredinthehome...havenot
beenfoundtobeassociated withanexcessincidenceofchildhood
leukemia or othercancers.'
In summary, there are very good reasons to believe that weak
electromagnetic fields from our electrical distribution system
have no biological effect at all. And there is no good reason
to believe otherwise. The fear of weak magnetic fields cost the
U.S. an estimated $23 billion by 1993 and continues to cost
in unnecessary transmission line relocation, abandonment of
structures, and loss in property values, etc. The EMF/cancer non-
problem should be scientifically relegated into the abyss that has
swallowed cold fusion, N-rays, polywater, Lysenko's anti-genetics,
and otheraberrations.
Having read Adair's comments one question springs to mind: If
we think of EMR as metaphoric leaves breaking metaphoric heads,
