EMF

To: mail11: ;
Subject: EMF
From: pierson-at-msd26.enet.dec-dot-com
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 96 10:48:33 EDT
Cc: pierson-at-msd26.enet.dec-dot-com


I've been watching the 'fields' issue for about 20 years, off and on.

Much ROT has been written (not the hard studies, so much, as some of the
'scarehead' popularizations), as neear as i can tell.  (I had not seen the
studied Richard Hull refers to of the previous studies, demostrating the flaws.)
I did see one study which showed that each successive study claiming to find
an effect found LESS effect: as the investigative techniques improved (?) LESS
was found.  Many of the studies DO NOT take any steps to remove 'confounders',
random, or nonrandom, contributors to 'cancer' (eg: a study of linemen that
ignores the chemicals they work with, or the herbicides used on the RoW, etc)

_ONE_ case, of course, does not prove anything, however consider the difference
between th early radium and XRay experimenters, many of whom died of cancer
(this can be documented....) before the risks were know to, ferinstanct,
Nikola Tesla who died (as near as i know) at age 80 (?), of (more or less)
'old age'.

	regards
	dwp