[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Power Lines and Magneti



> There is some in vitro science to suggest ELF fields may be hazardous
> as carcinogens

Can't imagine what in vitro science you are referring to here.  Every 
cellular study of genotoxic potential that I am aware of is negative.

> and support for this area has been so poor that critical research
> is not put to the test of replication for years.

The lack of replication is not due to a lack of funding.  This is one of
the most intensely studied unproven hazards in history.  I would argue
that this area has been funded (generally by set-aside funding) in total
disregard to the level of evidence and the quality of the science.

> If the science goes untested due to lack of interest as manifested by
> funding, then there will be a core of science to underpin public
> concern.

If there was all the money in the world, then I might agree.  But when
money is very tight, as it is now, investigators have the obligation to
prove that they have something before they demand public funds.

> The Federal government didn't help.

Are you arguing that the feds should set aside money for this area??  Why 
wasn't/isn't the science good enough that it can compete for funding 
against other areas and biomedical science??

> Congress moved in and got NIEHS to take the lead.

I'd phrase that differently.  Congress mandated that NIEHS set aside
money from its regular research grant pool and fund power-frequency
studies, even when peer-review did not give the studies merit scores, in
the general competition, that would have merited funding.

> I feel the answers lie in the lab, not in more epi studies unless   
> epi studies address such phenomena as transients, harmonics, and
> resonance/windows.  Even then, replicated lab studies will probably do
> a better job of determining what's happening.

But the lab studies are out there, in the peer-reviewed literature.  
- they show that power-frequency fields are not genotoxic
- they show little evidence that power-frequency fields have epigenetic 
activity
- they show essentially no evidence that power-frequency fields of the
intensity  encountered in occupational and environmental settings have
any biological effects at all

What additional studies do you want done? And what other fields of
biomedical research do you propose to divert funds from to pay for these
studies.

Disclaimer:  Although I was a member of the review groups that reviewed 
most of the proposals submitted to the NIEHS under the program being
discussed here, my comments are based entirely on material that is in the 
public record.

john moulder (jmoulder@its.mcw.edu)