Which sums up the current debate over ELFs effecting human health. There is sum evidence experimental and anecdotal evidence, that despite what our current knowledge of science says, indicates low level EM fields can effect cells.
But many of these effects can be explained with our current scientific understanding. Like the tree business. But depending on which camp you sit in, the evidence is not always looked at in an unbiased manner. Andrew Carson - Senior Compliance Engineer, Xyratex, UK Phone: +44 (0)23 9249 6855 Fax: +44 (0)23 9249 6014 -----Original Message----- From: Scott Douglas [mailto:dougl...@naradnetworks.com] Sent: 26 June 2002 13:22 To: Lista de EMC da IEEE Subject: RE: Environmental question Not to keep this old thing going forever, but the most likely scenario for the trees growing larger/stronger might be a combination of effects. When you open up a path like that, there is more sunlight allowed to get to the trees on either side of the path. Add to that the effects pointed out by Andrew below. The result should be taller and therefore stronger trees. This is what a managed forest would look like, with selective cutting allowing the same things to happen. Maybe no rocket science here, just some good old horticulture going on. Scott At 09:22 AM 6/26/02 +0100, Andrew Carson wrote: >No, unfortunately it was a anecdotal comment on a piece about general >research into the effect of RF fields on organics. > >You could also theorize that the digging activity to build the antenna >had nicely turned the soil. Improving the oxygen and nutrients getting >into the ground and helping the plants. > >Personally though I have constructed a similar antenna in my garden, in >the vain hope it might make he roses grow bigger :-) > >Andrew Carson - Senior Compliance Engineer, Xyratex, UK > >Phone: +44 (0)23 9249 6855 Fax: +44 (0)23 9249 6014 > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jacob Schanker [mailto:schan...@frontiernet.net] >Sent: 25 June 2002 20:18 >To: Andrew Carson; Scott Douglas; Muriel Bittencourt de Liz; Lista de >EMC da IEEE >Subject: Re: Environmental question > > >Andrew: > >One could theorize that the better growth had nothing to do with RF, but >with the tower not competing with the surrounding trees for nutrients. >Did >New Scientist make any cause and effect comments? > >I wonder what the EMC-PSTC group thinks of this issue - should there be >concern for irradiating trees with cellular phone calls? My own opinion >mimics the tag line of John Stoessel on a US ABC-TV news magazine show: >"Give me a break." (idomatic expression meaning something like "go >away, >don't you have better things to worry about?") > >Regards, > >Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E. >65 Crandon Way >Rochester, NY 14618 >Phone: 585 442 3909 >Fax: 585 442 2182 >j.schan...@ieee.org > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Andrew Carson" <andrew_car...@uk.xyratex.com> >To: "Scott Douglas" <dougl...@naradnetworks.com>; "Muriel Bittencourt de >Liz" <mur...@eel.ufsc.br>; "Lista de EMC da IEEE" <emc-p...@ieee.org> >Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:13 AM >Subject: RE: Environmental question > > >I remember reading an article about this in New Scientist. After several >years of operation they had found the Trees to either side of the >antenna were growing taller and stronger than the rest of those in the >Forest. > > > >Andrew Carson > >Senior Compliance Engineer > >Xyratex, UK > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Scott Douglas [mailto:dougl...@naradnetworks.com] >Sent: 25 June 2002 13:16 >To: Muriel Bittencourt de Liz; Lista de EMC da IEEE >Subject: Re: Environmental question > > > >Muriel, > >Don't know if there are any agency type regulations but can remember >this issue came up when the government wanted to install a >communications antenna in the north woods of Wisconsin. The antenna was >to be used to communicate to submarines deep under water using something >like 30 Hz or 60 Hz radio waves. The antenna was a long (miles long) >cable buried underground. There were many battles between the local >citizens, various environmental and animal groups, and the government >(US Navy?). If I recall correctly, there were even court cases trying to >prevent the antenna from being installed. The concerns were related to >what effect the RF would have on the environment to include plants and >animals. Don't know for sure, but I believe the antenna was actually >installed and was/is operating. Might be worth a look to see what came >of that and to see what arguments were made pro/con. Might even be >something came out of all that related to what you want to know. > >Regards, >Scott > > > >Senior Compliance Engineer >Narad Networks >515 Groton Road >Westford, MA 01886 >office: 978 589-1869 >cell: 978-239-0693 >dougl...@naradnetworks.com >www.naradnetworks.com <http://www.naradnetworks.com/> > > > >At 06:13 PM 6/24/02 -0300, Muriel Bittencourt de Liz wrote: > >Hello Group, > >We already know the standards related to human exposure to >electromagnetic >fields (e.g. ANSI/IEEE). However some people have asked us if >there is any >standard/recommendations limiting the exposure of forests, >lakes/rivers, >animals, etc to RF fields. > >Do you know any FDA and EPA (or another agency) that regulate >this subject >of RF fields incidence? > >Example: Imagine a radio-base station (mobile comm) or antenna >(TV or radio) >put in the middle of a forest, where there is not human >habitation, but we >have animals, trees and waters. Is there any >standard/recommendation related >to this case (only for non-ionizing radiation, ie, EM >radiation). > >Thanks in advance and Regards, > >Muriel > > > > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------- >This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety >Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > >Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ > >To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > majord...@ieee.org >with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > >For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com > Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com > >For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org > Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org > >All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ > Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list" ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list" ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
