-Caveat Lector-

Dave Hartley
http://www.Asheville-Computer.com
http://www.ioa.com/~davehart


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 1999 12:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: (fwd) Spin control: EMF / Health effects


(from the EMF-l mail list)

=======
                               Microwave News

                        Something Is Terribly Wrong

   In June 1999, these three events happen in just three days:

   o The NIEHS issues its report to Congress, which concludes that the
   evidence that EMFs pose a cancer risk cannot be dismissed. Though this
   evidence is weak, the NIEHS says, it is reason enough for prudent
   avoidance (see p.1).

   o EMFs are linked to as much as a sixfold increase in the risk of
   leukemia among young children, in a new study released by the
   University of Toronto (see p.12).

   o Dr. Robert Liburdy agrees to withdraw three graphs in seven-year-old
   papers on EMF effects on cellular calcium (see p.1).

   Which of these stories makes page-one headlines across the country?
   The Liburdy affair. And what is the lesson that the New York Times
   draws from the Liburdy business? That "electric power is safe."

   Liburdy's calcium experiments were not cancer studies and had only the
   most speculative relationship to cancer biology. When they were
   published in 1992, anyone who had said, "This shows that EMFs cause
   cancer" would have been laughed out of the room. It would have been a
   ridiculous thing to say, and no one ever did.

   Yet now these three Liburdy graphs seem to become more powerful each
   time they are mentioned in the media. The Associated Press (July 23)
   claimed that Liburdy's calcium work "was thought to be the first
   plausible biological explanation" of an EMF-cancer connection. Not one
   cancer researcher, biologist or biophysicist was quoted in support of
   this assertion, perhaps because it is not true.

   The AP conceded that concerns about EMFs "had been raised well before
   Liburdy's study," but the New York Times (July 24) wasted no space on
   such qualifications. In the Times' hands, Liburdy's graphs became
   "crucial evidence of a tie between electric power lines and
   cancer"-which had been "faked." Soon the Cleveland Plain Dealer (July
   30) was writing that Liburdy "managed to scare the bejabbers out of a
   lot of people by spinning a yarn about electrical transmission lines
   causing cancer," and applauded government fraud-busters for exposing
   this "hoax."

   The power of the Liburdy graphs continued to grow. It was in fact
   "Liburdy's deception" which "sparked a campaign of 'prudent
   avoidance'," according to Dr. Elizabeth Whelan of the pro-industry
   American Council on Science and Health, writing in the Wall Street
   Journal (July 27). "We now know" that the EMF issue "is a phony health
   risk," added Whelan. Ken Hall of the Edison Electric Institute seems
   to agree: "As long as you don't touch the wire, it's okay," Hall told
   the Los Angeles Times (July 29), in a story about commercial
   development directly beneath high-voltage power lines. The paper
   estimated that EMFs in the proposed development would average about 60
   mG.

   What's ironic is that of the three June events, only two have much to
   do with EMFs and cancer: the NIEHS report and the Canadian study. Yet
   those were precisely the two that the media ignored.

   There is a serious double standard at work here. The stories on the
   Liburdy affair are full of false statement which are repeated so
   often, without rebuttal, that they are already accepted as fact. Where
   are the moderating voices of public health, of epidemiologists, of
   consumer advocates?

   We don't believe in conspiracies. But at times the influence of
   corporate power in both science and the media is so overwhelming that
   it starts to resemble one. Industries worth hundreds of billions of
   dollars defend their interests, and they do so in many ways.

   Recently, a leading epidemiologist at a world-famous medical
   institution wrote to us on the Liburdy media blitz. He said, "One
   reason I left this field was that I saw it was virtually impossible to
   get decent science funded or done without interference in the face of
   such massive commercial interest." But we can't tell you who he is.
   His next sentence was, "Don't quote me."

=======

 -- Jeff --    http://www.wellnow.com

---------------------------------------------------------
 Well Now Health Information Service
 Box 15524 Atlanta Georgia [30333]
---------------------------------------------------------
 "There's nothing left in the world to prove. All that's worth doing is
  to love one another, using any means available to that purpose."
---------------------------------------------------------

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to