Re: FAQs on "EMF" and Health

["John Moulder" <jmoulder@post.its.mcw.edu>]

> "EMF" and Health 
> I wonder if the "science" recognizes that, over the last century, 
> while EMF exposure has risen by orders of magnitude, cancer incidence 
> is almost unchanged?

That's FAQ 23a:

------
Jackson [E9] and Olsen [C17] argue that a connection between cancer and power 
lines is unlikely because childhood and adult leukemia rates have
been stable over a period of time when per capita power consumption has risen 
dramatically. This argument presumes that "exposure" has risen in parallel
with "consumption"; there is little relevant historical data to support this 
assumption, and there are technical reasons to question its validity.
------

Keep in mind:

1) Hard data on cancer incidence only going back a few decades (mortality data 
goes a bit further back).

2) Older houses, generally have higher H-fields than newer ones (even though 
they have fewer amps of service) because of changes in wiring practice (tube-
and-knob vs conduit or "romex", elimination of current loops for overhead 
lights, and elimination of high water pipe ground currents)

3) If power-frequency fields are associated with cancer, there is no reason to 
assume that it is the average field intensity that matters.  What if its 
transients and harmonics that matter?  Power is often far "dirtier" than it 
sued to be at the distribution end because of solid state devices on the 
circuits.


------------------------------------
John Moulder (jmoulder@its.mcw.edu)
Maintainer:  Powerlines & Cancer FAQs, 
             Static EM Fields and Cancer FAQs
             Cell Phone Antennas & Health FAQ
USENET: sci.med.physics, sci.answers, news.answers.
http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop.html/