Re: EMF and cancer

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net>]

Glenn, as has been the case, provides many 
comments, which are indicative of his legal 
profession, wordy and leading, and occasionally, 
a point is actually made. More often than not, I 
see a lot of words, yet can find no real 
position stated on any of the topics addressed. 
We see articles quoted. We see "opinions" from 
others, but never an opinion from Glenn. What we 
see are comments made on everyone else's 
comments, but never an original opinion. It 
would be refreshing to see Glenn state an 
opinion occasionally, other than to simply state 
that anytime one disagrees with an issue, that 
they are just biased, and typical of the "health 
physics community" who are going to aimlessly 
support anything nuclear (as if they were 
nothing but puppets pulled by the strings of the 
"pro-nuclear masters", and attack anything anti-
nuclear. As far as EMF, it would be interesting 
to see what data Glenn has seen that allows him 
to state that anyone who attacks the study is 
just biased, and that the facts speak for 
themselves. I haven't seen any data, just the 
article. I have seen data from other studies 
though, and their conclusions, accepted by the 
scientific community, and not just the health 
physicists on Radsafe, are well established.



------------------
Sandy Perle
Technical Director
ICN Dosimetry Division
ICN Plaza
3300 Hyland Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Office: (800) 548-5100 x2306 
Fax:    (714) 668-3111
  
sandyfl@earthlink.net
sperle@icnpharm.com

ICN Dosimetry Website:
http://www.dosimetry.com

Personal Website:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/1205

"The object of opening the mind, as of opening 
the mouth, is to close it again on something solid"
              - G. K. Chesterton -

The opinions expressed are solely, absolutely, positively, definitely those of the author, and NOT my employer