EMFguru #1-96, A Non Sequitur

Hi everybody!

We fervently hope that you begin the new year in good health and good spirits ... eager to "shine the light."

A "non sequitur" is an inference or a conclusion which does not follow from the premises. We are calling this message a "non sequitur" to highlight what is probably the most exploited argument that is appearing in the EMF health hazard discussions. It is repeated so often and so routinely that its (insidious) distortion is now accepted as truth ... even by those who should know better (the media, for example).

"Science has not 'proved' that EMF can cause cancer ... so what are you worrying about ... it's safe." The latter clause may be said in various ways. It may be said explicitly. Or it may be "said" implicitly ... by the way the speaker presents his/her case. Or it might be "said" by the manner and behavior of the speaker who is often so much better informed than his/her audience. That is typically the case at these utility sponsored meetings where the goal is to reassure the audience rather then impart true knowledge.

However this "cancer has not been 'proved', don't worry" message is delivered ... it is a cruel distortion of what is actually known about the health effects of EMF.

THE FACTS .......

1) By a three or four to one margin, more than 50 epidemiological studies have pointed to an association between EMF exposure and a variety of adverse health effects of which cancer is one ... but which now must include Alzheimer's Disease as well. Whereas the risk factors for most cancers have consistently fallen in the 1.5 to 3.0 range ... the numbers are somewhat higher for Alzheimer's. (A risk factor of 1.0 is a "no risk" result. A factor of 1.5 is a 50% above the "normal risk" result. A factor of 3.0 is a 200% above "the norm" result.)
2) While the risk factors obtained so far in the EMF case are lower than those obtained in the case of tobacco, for example, this does not mean that they are so low that they should be ignored or treated as "not valid." They are higher than a number of comparable cases that the health community regards with great seriousness--"second hand smoke," for example, which the U.S. government has recently declared a public health menace. Indeed the U.S. public has so declared it!
3) The epidemiological evidence is increasingly being bulwarked by the biological evidence which now provides some explanations for how the adverse health consequences may be occurring. The completion of this process is certain to take many years--perhaps decades. Those who wish to forestall the public's knowledge (thus the ability to take action) on this issue naturally place all the emphasis they can on what has not been "proved." This deliberately diverts the public (and public action institutions like the media as well as local, state and federal governments) away from the focus they should be on, namely: what we do know!

(EMFguru #4-95 addressed the most recent biological research results. It was not in depth and we do intend to return to that subject soon, so we will say nothing more on the biological proof that is available at this time. Suffice it to say that we are frankly suspicious of the motives of those who are trying to divert public understanding by denigrating the value of this research.)

The "TIME" Factor ......

What we wish to concentrate on here is the "time-lag" factor. We believe it is crucial to an understanding of the full dimensions of the EMF health threat. And its importance derives in part out of the continued misdirection of public attention that is brought about by the present emphasis on the "cancer has not been proved therefore don'tworry" non sequitur.

Virtually all research that has taken place so far has come to the conclusion that these adverse health responses (from EMF exposure) probably do not occur instantaneously.

They appear to arise slowly over a long period of time and perhaps prolonged exposure. (e.g., 5 to 10 years in the case of leukemia or perhaps 30 to 40 years in the case of Alzheimer's.)

Consider this: the health cases that are coming to light in 1996 probably had their origin in the 1980s or before.

The damage that is being inflicted today we cannot see. We cannot even estimate it because a government that does not admit that "there's a problem" is not gathering the data that would provide us a basis for such an estimate.

Finally, add to the above picture the fact that the amount of EMF in the public's exposure environment is increasing each year at a (gross) rate of two-and-a-half to three percent per year compounded. That is based upon the average annual rate of growth in electricity production, so it must be a gross number. (Don't use it to estimate the increase in 'your' environment which is certain to be impacted by many other variables not addressed here.) It is provided to suggest the extent to which the EMF problem increases over time if we continue to avoid it.

The "Bottom Line".......

Guru believes that the "bottom line" fact on this aspect is that human exposure to EMF damage is at the outer edge of the exposure envelope. We probably entered that envelope (to such a degree that observable damage could occur) about 30 years ago.

Coincidentally, that was also about the time of the "explosion" in the construction of power plants and the transmission lines that move the power from the plant to the consumer.

When guru was working in the "PR" side of this business in the 1980s he heard and used a "PR" claim (He never knew how 'provable' the statement was, but it was widely used in the industry.) -- that the growth in the sale of electricity was up 500% in thirty years.

That growth was supposed to have occurred from some point in the 1950s to some point in the 1980s. However much of a "PR" exaggeration that statement may have been, it does not overstate by much the kind of growth rate an advanced "electronic" society may experience in its vulnerability to EMF damage.

Present growth rates are slower than they were then, but the recent "explosion" of electronics and electrical equipment of all types (not to overlook cellular phones) in the American home and workplace does not afford us much latitude to ignore the EMF problem.

We can be certain that our "EMF problem" will grow--and at a compounding rate--if we ignore it and do not begin to take measures to deal with it.

The next time someone says to you, "but cancer has not been 'proved'," think upon these matters...

NEXT......

Guru's next message will discuss the NCRP Draft Report. That's the National Committee for Radiation Protection -- the "grand champion" bureaucracy of America's scientific community. If you want to have some fun on this one, go to your video rental store and check out two movies to view (a "fun" homework assignment) -- Lorenzo's Oil with Susan Sarandon and The Distinguished Gentleman with Eddy Murphy. After you've seen those films, you'll be ready to hear about the NCRP.

back to the home page http://www.feb.se