Near our building near downtown San Jose, in what are called "the county
buildings", one county building wing had 15 cases of very rare form of brain
tumors. The incidence of a single case is very rare but to have so many in
one building and only in one wing of that building is statistically
incredible.
They did an extensive survey trying to find something different between the
two wings of this building. As I recall, the survey took almost 18 months
and the report's results were inconclusive. They looked at building
materials, air conditioning and heating systems, water distribution, toilet
facilities, and on and on, including emf - which not only included elf from
the mains, but included the periodic blast of microwave as the nearby
airport radar swept around. They found absolutely nothing different between
the wings of their building.
According to the epidemiologist, this form of cancer is rare because it
grows so slowly that it takes too long to show up, something like 40 years
from onset, which means most people died of something else first. She felt
that whatever it was that these people were being exposed to had "sped" up
the cancer turning it from so slow nobody notices to so rapid people died of
it. Again, she wondered if something was accelerating the cancer's growth
rate (with cancer present in the person anyway, but the exposure did not
cause cancer).
The only difference I could see (and was not mentioned in the report) was
that people in the west wing (sick building part) tended to park their
vehicles directly across Guadalupe parkway under 115KV massive power towers.
I thought that perhaps the fluctuation entering and exiting their vehicles
(These were the old steel body automobiles) did something to these people.
I asked for small amount of funding to pursue this investigation but could
not obtain funds. So measuring the situation, and collecting data on the
incidences of who parked where, etc is now lost. [The towers are now gone,
replaced by underground transmission lines to "beautify" the Guadalupe
Parkway corridor. ]
At that same time there were some publications claiming the acceration of
cancer cells by exposing the cells to a range of magnetic field exposure,
including variable amount of exposure. One paper claimed that varying
exposure was the key.
This is all food for thought.
- Robert -
-----Original Message-----
From: mkel...@es.com <mkel...@es.com>
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org <emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org>
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thursday, December 02, 1999 1:52 PM
Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards?
>
>I remember seeing a television show quite a while ago where researchers had
>found an extremely high cancer rate in children in one neighborhood with a
>power substation. The rate for adults, however, was normal.
>
>One researcher said she believed that the higher rate for children might be
>due to the fact that they were very active in running back and forth and
>playing ball, etc. This caused them to cut through the magnetic fields at
a
>much higher rate than adults. This line of thought leads to the
possibility
>that there may be more to consider than just simple warming of tissue.
>
> Max Kelson
> Evans & Sutherland
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barry Ma [mailto:barry...@altavista.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 1999 11:48 AM
> To: jgri...@i-spec.com
> Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: Cell Phone Hazards?
>
>
> Jon,
>
> You are right. When we get in our cars we have some risk. By
>the same token, when we are home the risk is still not zero. If we go
>climbing the risk would go even higher. The point is we know what is the
>risk and how to protect ourselves. But the risk related to cell phone is
not
>as clear as driving, climbing, and staying home.
>
> Barry Ma
> Anritsu Company
> -------------
> On Wed, 01 December 1999, Jon Griver wrote:
>
> > It seems to me quite possible that electromagnetic fields
>with strengths
> > below the 'tissue heating' level may have a detrimental
>effect. After all
> > we know that electrical impulses are intimately connected
>with the brain's
> > operation, and we are dealing with fields an order of
>magnitude stonger
> > than those used in radiated immunity testing for
>electrical and electronic
> > equipment. We only expect electronic equipment to be
>immune to 3V/m, but we
> > subject our brains to 20 to 30V/m when we use a cell
>phone.
> >
> > This being said, the cell phone is very convenient, and
>has become a part
> > of our way of life. I use a cell phone, though as little
>as possible,
> > knowing that there is a possible risk, in the same way as
>I know I risk my
> > life every time I get in my car.
> >
> > Jon Griver
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
> Open your mind. Close your wallet.
> Free Internet Access from AltaVista.
>http://www.altavista.com
>
>
---------
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
