Health Effects of EMF Exposure: the Mercury
Connection (Gov’t studies)
In a long term comprehensive electromagnetic
fields(EMF) risk assessment study by the
California Dept. of Health Services, all reviewers concluded that it is highly
likely that EMF causes some forms of cancer, along with chronic neurological
conditions like
Actually there is strong evidence in the medical literature already
supporting these conclusions and documenting mechanisms by which the effects
occur. The evidence is based on the fact
that chronic mercury exposure has been documented to cause all of these
conditions (12-16), and EMF, microwave,
or MRI exposure has been documented to cause significant release of mercury
into the body, including the brain and Central Nervous System, from those who
have amalgam(2,19). Studies have found
persons with chronic exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF), microwaves, or MRIs to have higher levels of mercury exposure and excretion(2,9,19).</SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font‑family: Times
New Roman"></SPAN> Electromagnetic fields are
known to induce current in metals and would increase the documented effects of
galvanism (9,12-16). Amalgam has also been documented
to be the largest source of mercury exposure in most people who have amalgam fillings(12,16).
EMF
is also documented in animal and human studies to cause cellular calcium efflux
and affect calcium homeostasis(3,4), which may be a
factor in the reduction of melatonin levels caused by EMF exposure in animal
and human studies(4,5). In studies on chicks this had significant adverse
effects on viability of embryos and chicks.
Melatonin is known to be protective against mercury and free radical
activity and against cell proliferation(cancer)(17),
as well as regulating the circadian rhythm cycle and sleep cycle. EMF exposure
lowers melatonin production, disrupts the sleep cycle(5,8c),
and blocks melatonin’s cell antiproliferation effects
(17). Another
study provides
evidence for an association between occupational electromagnetic fields and
suicide(10). The authors indicate that a plausible mechanism related to
melatonin and depression provides a direction for additional laboratory
research as well as epidemiological evaluation.
Occupational exposure to higher levels of EMF have
also been found in many studies to result in much higher risk of chronic
degenerative neurological conditions such as
References
(1)
California Dept. of Health Services, California EMF Program, Draft of final
risk evaluation report,
www.dhs.cahwnet.gov/ehib/emf/RiskEvaluation/riskeval.html
(2)
F.Schmidt et al, "Mercury in urine of employees
exposed to magnetic fields", Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen,
1997, 117(2): 199‑202; & Granlund-Lind R, Lans M, Rennerfelt J,
"Computers and amalgam are the most common causes of hypersensitivity to
electricity according to sufferers' reports", Läkartidningen
2002; 99: 682-683 (Swedish); & Sheppard AR and EisenbudM.,
Biological Effects of electric and
magnetic fields of extremely low frequency.
(3) Aldinucci C; Palmi M; Sgaragli G; Benocci A; Meini A; Pessina F; Pessina GP. The effect of pulsed electromagnetic
fields on the physiologic behaviour of a human
astrocytoma cell line. Biochim Biophys Acta 2000, 11;1499(1‑2):101‑108; & Fitzsimmons
RJ, Ryaby JT, Magee FP, Baylink
DJ. Combined magnetic fields increased
net calcium flux in bone cells. Calcif Tissue Int 1994 Nov;55(5):376‑80
(4) Pablos MI;
(5)
Juutilainen J; Stevens RG; et al; Nocturnal 6‑hydroxymelatonin sulfate
excretion in female workers exposed to
magnetic fields. J Pineal Res 2000 ;28(2):97‑104;
& Akerstedt T;
Arnetz B; Ficca G; Paulsson LE; Kallner A. A 50‑Hz electromagnetic field impairs sleep. J Sleep Res 1999
Mar;8(1):77‑8
& Ronco AL, Halberg
F. The pineal gland
and cancer. Anticancer Res 1996 Jul‑Aug;16(4A):2033‑9;
&
&
Zecca L, Mantegazza C,
Margonato V, Cerretelli P, Caniatti M, Piva F, Dondi D,
Hagino N. Biological
effects of prolonged exposure to ELF electromagnetic
fields in rats:
(6)
Savitz DA; Checkoway H;
Loomis DP. Magnetic field exposure and neurodegenerative disease
mortality among electric utility workers.
Epidemiology 1998 Jul;9(4):398‑404; & Savitz DA; Loomis DP; Tse
CK. Electrical occupations and neurodegenerative disease:
analysis of
(7)
Sobel E; Dunn M; Davanipour
Z; Qian Z; Chui HC.
Elevated risk of Alzheimer's disease among workers
with likely electromagnetic field
exposure. Neurology 1996 ;47(6):1477‑81; & Sobel E, Davanipour Z.
Electromagnetic field exposure may cause increased production of amyloid beta and eventually lead to Alzheimer's
disease. Neurology.
1996 Dec;47(6):1594‑600; & Sobel E; Davanipour Z; Sulkava R; Erkinjuntti T; Wikstrom J et
al; Occupations with exposure to electromagnetic fields: a possible risk factor
for Alzheimer's disease. Am J Epidemiol 1995 Sep 1;142(5):515‑24; & Hansen NH, Sobel E, Davanipour Z, Gillette
LM, Niiranen J, Wilson BW. EMF exposure assessment in the finnish garment industry:
evaluation of proposed EMF exposure metrics.
Bioelectromagnetics 2000, Jan;21(1):57‑67
(8) London SJ; Bowman JD; Sobel
E; Thomas DC; Garabrant DH; Pearce N; Bernstein L;
Peters JM. Exposure to
magnetic fields among electrical workers in relation to leukemia risk in
(9)
Mercury Exposure and Health Effects from Dental Amalgam Galvanism,
www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/galv.html
(10)van Wijngaarden E, Savatz D, Kleckner R, Cai J, Loomis D.
Exposure to electromagnetic fields and suicide among electric utility
Workers: a nested case-control study. Occup Environ
Med 2000; 57:258-263
(11) Zyss T, Dobrowolski JW, Krawczyk K. Neurotic disturbances, depression and anxiety
disorders in the population living in the vicinity of overhead high‑voltage
transmission line 400 kV. Epidemiological pilot study Med Pr 1997;48(5):495‑505
(12) Kingman A, Albertini
T, Brown LJ, Mercury
concentrations in urine and whole blood associated with amalgam exposure in a
US military population., J Dent Res 1998
Mar;77(3):461-71
(population of
over 1000 Air Force personnel; found each 10 amalgam surfaces increased mercury
in urine by approx. 1 microgram per liter); &
(b)
Leistevuo J, Pyy L, Osterblad M, Dental
amalgam fillings and the amount of organic mercury in human saliva. Caries Res 2001 May‑Jun;35(3):163‑6; &
(c)
Bjorkman L, Sandborgh-Englund
G, Ekstrand J.
"Mercury in Saliva and Feces after Removal of Amalgam
Fillings", Toxicology
and Applied Pharmacology, 1997, 144(1), p156-62;
(d)
Mercury levels from amalgam fillings, DAMS, www.flcv.com/damspr1.html
(13) Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis(
(14) Alzheimer’s Disease: the Mercury Connection, www.flcv.com/alzhg.html
(15) Depression: the Mercury Connection:
www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/depress.html
(16)Mercury
exposure and related health effects from amalgam fillings, www.flcv.com/amalg6.html
(B.Windham(Ed.), over
2000 peer-reviewed medical studies
reviewed and referenced),
(17)
Drs Masami Ishido and Hiroshi Nitta,
www.tassie.net.au/emfacts/forum/1_4ezine3.html
(18) Draper G, Vincent T, Kroll M
& Swanson J, Oxford Childhood Cancer Research Group - Childhood cancer and
electromagnetic field exposures from powerlines -
Department of Health funded 1997-2001, RRX 46
(19) Mercury release from dental amalgam
restorations after magnetic resonance imaging and following mobile phone
use. Pak J Biol Sci. 2008 Apr 15;11(8):
1142-6, Mortazavi SM, Daiee E, Yazdi A, Khiabani K, Mood MB,et al
Pablos MI;
of calcium on melatonin secretion in chick pineal gland I. Neurosci Lett
1996 Oct18;217(2‑3):161‑4; & Nikaido SS; Takahashi JS. Calcium modulates circadian variation in cAMP‑stimulated melatonin in chick pineal cells. Brain Res 1996 Apr
15;716(1‑2):1‑10; & Youbicier‑Simo BJ; Boudard F; Cabaner C; Bastide M. Biological effects of continuous exposure of embryos and young chickens to electromagnetic fields emitted by video display units. Bioelectromagnetics 1997;18(7):514‑23
(lower melatonin & adverse effects on embryos & young chicks)
calcium input from extracellular medium and output from intracellular
calcium reserves are primary mechanisms in the
activation of melatonin synthesis in the chick pineal gland
****
causes cell calcium efflux and affects calcium homeostatis
Aldinucci C; Palmi M; Sgaragli G; Benocci A; Meini A; Pessina F; Pessina GP. The effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields on the physiologic behaviour of a
human astrocytoma cell line. Biochim Biophys Acta 2000 Dec 11;1499(1‑2):101‑108
EMF exposed workers consistently produced less melatonin
Juutilainen J; Stevens RG; et al; Nocturnal 6‑hydroxymelatonin sulfate excretion in female workers exposed to magnetic fields. J Pineal Res 2000 ;28(2):97‑104; & Akerstedt T; Arnetz B; Ficca G; Paulsson LE; Kallner A. A 50‑Hz electromagnetic field impairs sleep. J Sleep Res 1999 Mar;8(1):77‑81
(impairs sleep quan. & qual.)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Savitz DA; Checkoway H; Loomis DP. Magnetic field exposure and
neurodegenerative disease mortality among electric utility workers.
Epidemiology 1998 Jul;9(4):398‑404. (higher risk in occupations
with exposure, and inc with time)
Savitz DA; Loomis DP; Tse CK. Electrical occupations and
neurodegenerative disease: analysis
of
Health 1998 Jan‑Feb;53(1):71‑4.
(5 times higher risk for power plant operators‑
Johansen C; Olsen JH. Mortality from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis,
other chronic disorders, and electric shocks among utility workers.Am J
Epidemiol 1998 Aug 15;148(4):362‑8. higher
risk of
more exposure
Davanipour Z; Sobel E; Bowman JD; Qian Z; Will AD. Amyotrophic lateral
sclerosis and occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields.
Bioelectromagnetics 1997;18(1):28‑35. Occup. with higher exposure to
EMF had higher risk of
***
Savitz DA; Checkoway H; Loomis DP. Magnetic field exposure and
neurodegenerative disease mortality among electric utility workers.
Epidemiology 1998 Jul;9(4):398‑404;
& Savitz
DA; Loomis DP; Tse CK. Electrical occupations and
neurodegenerative disease: analysis of
Health 1998 Jan‑Feb;53(1):71‑4; & Johansen C; Olsen JH. Mortality from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, other chronic disorders, and electric shocks among utility workers.Am J
Epidemiol 1998 Aug 15;148(4):362‑8; & Davanipour Z; Sobel E; Bowman JD; Qian Z; Will AD. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields.
Bioelectromagnetics 1997;18(1):28‑35.
***
Alz
Sobel E; Dunn M; Davanipour Z; Qian Z; Chui HC. Elevated risk of
Alzheimer's disease among workers with likely electromagnetic field
exposure. Neurology 1996 Dec;47(6):1477‑81.
Workers in occup. with more EMF exp. had 4 times higher risk of Alz
Sobel E, Davanipour Z. Electromagnetic field exposure may cause increased
production of amyloid beta and eventually lead to Alzheimer's disease.
Neurology. 1996 Dec;47(6):1594‑600.
Sobel E; Davanipour Z; Sulkava R; Erkinjuntti T; Wikstrom J;
Occupations with exposure to electromagnetic fields: a possible risk
factor for Alzheimer's disease. Am J Epidemiol 1995 Sep 1;142(5):515‑24.
(Occup with more exp. to EMF‑semstress
have 3 times higher risk of Alz)
**********
Sobel E; Dunn M; Davanipour Z; Qian Z; Chui HC. Elevated risk of Alzheimer's disease among workers with likely electromagnetic field exposure. Neurology 1996 ;47(6):1477‑81;
& Sobel E, Davanipour Z. Electromagnetic field exposure may cause increased
production of amyloid beta and eventually lead to Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1996 Dec;47(6):1594‑600; & Sobel E; Davanipour Z; Sulkava R; Erkinjuntti T; Wikstrom J et al;
Occupations with exposure to electromagnetic fields: a possible risk factor for Alzheimer's disease. Am J Epidemiol 1995 Sep 1;142(5):515‑24.
*************
Leukemia/Cancer
N; Bernstein L; Peters JM. Exposure to magnetic fields among electrical
workers in relation to leukemia
risk in
1994 Jul;26(1):47‑60.
(Higher risk of leukemia & mylenoid leukemia in occup. With more emf)
Breast Cancer
Caplan LS; Schoenfeld ER; O'Leary ES; Leske MC. Breast cancer and
electromagnetic fields‑‑a review. Ann Epidemiol 2000 Jan;10(1):31‑44
Lots of studies that find higher breast cancer in occup. exposed to
EMF(men & women)
‑
Aldinucci C; Palmi M; Sgaragli G; Benocci A;
Meini A; Pessina F; Pessina GP.
The effect of pulsed
electromagnetic fields on the physiologic behaviour of a
human astrocytoma
cell line. Biochim Biophys Acta 2000 Dec
11;1499(1‑2):101‑108.
ABSTRACT:
We evaluated the
effects of 50 Hz pulsed electromagnetic fields (EMFs) with a
peak magnetic field
of 3 mT on human astrocytoma cells. Our results clearly
demonstrate that,
after the cells were exposed to EMFs for 24 h, the basal
[Ca(2+)](i) levels
increased significantly from 124+/‑51 nM to 200+/‑79 nM.
Pretreatment of the
cells with 1.2 microM substance P increased the
[Ca(2+)](i) to
555+/‑278 nM, while EMF exposure caused a significant drop in
[Ca(2+)](i) to
327+/‑146 nM. The overall effect of EMFs probably depends on
the prevailing
Ca(2+) conditions of the cells. After exposure, the proliferative
responses of both
normal and substance P‑pretreated cells increased slightly
from 1.03 to 1.07
and 1.04 to 1.06, respectively. U‑373 MG cells spontaneously
released about 10 pg/ml of
interleukin‑6 which was significantly increased after
the addition of
substance P. Moreover, immediately after EMF exposure and
24 h thereafter,
the interleukin‑6 levels were more elevated (about 40%) than
in controls. On the
whole, our data suggest that, by changing the properties of
cell membranes,
EMFs can influence Ca(2+) transport processes and hence
Ca(2+) homeostasis.
The increased levels of interleukin‑6 after 24 h of EMF
exposure may
confirm the complex connection between Ca(2+) levels,
substance P and the
cytokine networ
*********************
Nevertheless, as
your question suggests, there are several studies from a number of countries
showing that suicide rates among
medical
practitioners are higher than those in the general population or in some other
professions (Lindeman et al, Psychological
Medicine, Sept.
1997 pp. 1219‑22; Lindeman et al, British Journal of Psychiatry March
1996, ppl 274‑79).
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
EMFs Increase
Suicide Rates
This study
examined mortality from suicide in relation to
estimated
exposure to extremely low‑frequency
electromagnetic
fields (EMFs) and found a significant increase
in the risk of
suicide.
Researchers
studied 138,905 male electric utility workers.
They found
a more than doubled risk with electricians and
an almost 60%
increase in line workers.
Even
stronger associations, up to a 3.5‑fold increase, were
found in
men younger than 50.
The authors
state that "These data provide evidence for an
association
between occupational electromagnetic fields and
suicide that
warrants further evaluation." They hypothesize
that this link
has something to do with disturbing melatonin
secretion or
metabolism.
COMMENT: There
is no question that EMF exposure should
be avoided as
much as possible. The practical issue is to
determine how to
avoid it. I have recently located some
relatively
inexpensive gauss meters which only cost $40
(800‑497‑9516).
I have absolutely no connection with this
firm and if
anyone has a better and less expensive device I
would be glad to
post that information. Generally, one
should try to
keep exposures as low as possible. Ideally,
your sleeping
environment and regular sitting places should
be less than 0.3
milligauss.
Related
Articles:
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
ELECTROMAGNETIC
FIELDS EXERT
EFFECTS ON
HORMONES
Several years
ago, Cindy Sage hired an electrician to install a
new light in her
daughter's bedroom. After he left, Sage swept
the room with a
gaussmeter to measure the magnetic fields
present. In some
98 percent of
strength of
magnetic fields ranges from 0.5 to 0.9 milligauss
(mG). Until the
electrician's visit, the field in Sage's daughter's
room also fell
within that range. Afterward, it was 3 mG.
Although that
reading is somewhat higher than normal, it falls
well below the federally
permitted 1,000‑mG limit for
workplaces.
However, this didn't reassure Sage, a Montecito,
(EMF) issues.
The workplace limit "is based on the faulty
assumption that
only thermal, or heat, effects are important as
a potential
biological hazard," she says.
Sage called the
electrician back to find out what he'd done. It
turns out that
he hadn't wired the light according to the
electrical code.
When he rewired the room, its average field
dropped to 0.2
mG. Electromagnetic fields are invisible lines of
force that
surround all electric devices and wiring. Concern
about the
potential health effects of these fields was catalyzed
in the late
1970s by studies suggesting an association between
childhood
leukemia and proximity to certain types of power
lines or equipment, such as
utility transformers.
Several studies
suggest "a doubling of childhood leukemia
incidence
between 1 and 2 mG" and up to a sixfold increase for
exposures between 4
and 5 mG, says Sage. There have even
been hints of a
breast cancer risk in adults exposed to high
fields More
recently, several other sources have been added:
large currents
on the job, poorly grounded wiring, and
appliances.
Magnetic fields do not necessarily correlate with
the size, power,
or noisiness of a device. Moreover, there can
be a tremendous
difference between models of an appliance.
Because it's
difficult to shield oneself from magnetic fields, the
only practical
way to limit exposures is to put distance between
oneself and the
source.
Sage conducts
sweeps of magnetic fields in her clients' homes,
offices,
schools, and hospitals. She deploys electricians to fix
any fields that
run dramatically above the national norm.
Usually, they
trace to code violations that prove easy and
inexpensive to fix. A 1996
report issued by the National
of affecting
biological tissues, their link to cancer remains
unproven.
However, Sage argues that until or unless EMFs are
exonerated,
avoidance of them is a reasonable policy
Richard G.
Stevens of the Department of Energy's Pacific
Northwest
National Laboratory in
disagrees,
arguing that it's premature to sweep homes or even
to advocate prudent
avoidance. That's not because he believes
EMFs are
necessarily benign. Indeed, he is the father of the
10‑year‑old
"melatonin hypothesis", a theory that exposure to
certain EMFs may trigger cancer,
especially in the breast, by
perturbing the
body's natural concentrations of this brain
hormone.
He says that
many questions remain about what types of fields
and features of
exposure‑such as timing‑underlie any risks. The
problem with
prudent avoidance is that it may make people
less willing to
act if the risks are later proved more
circumscribed.
Stevens doesn't challenge the idea that fields
can bring about
potentially disturbing biological changes.
Indeed, new studies describing
such effects were presented 7
weeks ago at a
U.S. Public Health Service conference he helped
organize in
hitherto
unrecognized responsiveness of cells, tissues, and
animals ‑
even humans.
Melatonin, a
hormone produced by the brain during periods of
darkness, is an important natural
suppressor of breast cancer
cell growth,
both in test tubes and in animals. Stevens'
melatonin
hypothesis holds that because EMFs can depress or
shut down
melatonin secretion in animals, they may play a role
in fostering the
growth of malignancies in people.
To test this
hypothesis, toxicologist Wolfgang Loescher of the
exposed groups
of up to 120 female rats to
melatonin‑suppressing
EMFs of between 100 and 1,000 mG. An
equal number of
rats received a negligible background exposure
of roughly 1 mG;
these rats produced melatonin normally.
Loescher
injected into each rat a chemical that causes
mammary cancer,
then observed the rats for 3 months.
Compared to the
unexposed rats, those in the 100‑mG field
developed about 10 percent more
tumors, animals exposed to
500 mG got 25
percent more, and rats receiving 1,000 mG
developed 50
percent more. Tumors also grew as much as twice
the size under the
influence of EMFs. To understand why,
Loescher has
focused on the immune system's T cells, a class
of white blood
cells whose role is to attack and destroy tumors
and foreign
substances. T cells from animals raised for 3
months in 500‑
or 1,000‑mG fields proved only half as likely as
those from
unexposed rats to proliferate when exposed to a
foreign
substance. "This indicates that EMFs indeed suppress
the immune
system's response to ongoing processes such as
tumor growth,"
Loescher says.
He has also
analyzed rats' production of the enzyme ornithine
decarboxylase.
This enzyme has to be present in large amounts
for any cells to
proliferate. "If the melatonin hypothesis were
true, then when
one exposes rats to EMFs, there should be an
increase of this
enzyme but only in the breast," he says. That
is exactly what he's found in EMF studies
that he has replicated
several times.
"To me," he told SCIENCE NEWS, "this is the
most convincing
data that the melatonin hypothesis may be
true."
At the
Liburdy has been
probing the underpinnings of EMFs' apparent
cancer fostering
effects in test‑tube studies of malignant cells.
He has found
that 12‑mG EMFs can suppress the ability of both
melatonin and
the hormone‑emulating drug tamoxifen to shut
down the growth of cancer
cells. In a follow‑up study that he
described in
July at a meeting in
another drug
proved even more negatively affected by 12‑mG
fields. Both
tamoxifen and this second drug, which goes by the
unwieldy moniker
have been
designed to dock at a cell's estrogen receptor and
block it. In the
breast, this can starve most cancer cells of the
estrogen that
normally spurs their growth. Unlike the
which interacts
only with the estrogen receptor, tamoxifen can
alter the
activity of other proteins. Magnetic fields proved more
effective
against the
its binding to
the estrogen receptor, Liburdy says. If they do,
then the body's
natural estrogen should be affected similarly.
Tests of that
possibility are now under way. Liburdy's studies
suggest that
"a new melatonin hypothesis is emerging," argues
Charles Graham,
an experimental physiologist at the
Research Institute (
hypothesis,
Graham notes, focused on how much melatonin the
body produced
and circulated. While reasonable, it downplayed
any relevance for humans because
"we saw no decrease in
melatonin"
among people exposed to EMFs. If magnetic fields
can make cells
less sensitive to melatonin, as studies by
Liburdy and others now
indicate, then EMFs may yet pose a
melatonin‑mediated
cancer threat, he says.
Graham's own
research indicates that magnetic fields can alter
two other hormones
that affect cancer risk‑‑estrogen and
testosterone.
Compared to measurements taken in the
presence of
negligible background fields, overnight exposure of
women to 200‑mG
EMFs in the laboratory significantly elevated
estrogen; other
studies have shown that elevated exposure to
estrogen over
many years can increase a woman's breast
cancer risk. In
men, the EMFs reduced testosterone‑a hormone
drop that has
been linked to testicular and prostate cancers,
Graham's most
intriguing data come from experiments with
what he terms
intermittent EMFs. He and Mary R. Cook, also at
hour and then
off for an hour throughout the night. During each
"on"
cycle, the field switches on and off every 15 seconds. Not
only do
preliminary studies indicate that intermittent fields
"really have an
effect," Graham observes, but they emulate
real‑world
exposures, which can vary from second to second in
frequency,
intensity, and waveform, depending on their source
and an
individual's distance from it.
In a 3‑night
study of 24 healthy young men, roughly one‑third
got steady 200
mG exposures on any given night. Another third
received 200‑mG
fields intermittently, and the remainder slept
in the presence
of negligible background fields. At the Energy
Department's annual
EMF Research Review Meeting in San
Diego last
November, Graham and Cook reported that the
intermittent
fields and only those fields‑disturbed 6 of 10
measures of
sleep quality. They not only contributed to broken
sleep and
shorter periods of deep, dream‑stage sleep, they
also led to more
reports of feeling unrested in the morning.
In an upcoming report in
BIOELECTROMAGNETICS, Graham's
team links those
same intermittent fields to decreased heart
rate variability
in 77 college‑age men. In healthy people, heart
rate tends to
vary somewhat from second to second in
response to the
body's need to maintain blood pressure,
temperature, and
so on. Often, individuals with heart disease
exhibit a more
stable heart rate‑‑‑an indication, Graham says,
"that their
heart is no longer as well connected to the nervous
system."
While the young
men that Graham studied exhibited normal
heart rate
variability during the nights they were exposed to
background
fields or constant EMFs, that variability diminished
substantially on
the night each was exposed to intermittent
fields. Graham
is planning follow‑up studies to probe the
long‑term
health implications of this provocative finding.
"What
concerns me," Graham says, is that the public "tends to
get so worried
about the magnitude of a field. The bigger it is,
the worse it's
supposed to be." In fact, Loescher has found that
very high
fields, as well as those below a certain strength,
have little
impact on tumor growth. Only those across a
relatively narrow range
consistently foster tumors and other
negative health
effects.
"We've seen
the same thing in our studies," Graham told
SCIENCE NEWS.
Moreover, he says, it's beginning to appear
that a field's
magnitude matters less than its intermittency or
other features,
such as power surges called electrical
transients. These surges can pack
a big burst of energy into a
short period of
time. They occur whenever lights or other
electric devices
turn on, when motors or compressors (such as
those in
refrigerators and air conditioners) cycle on, or when
dimmer switches
operate. "Being transient doesn't mean
they're rare,
just quick," Graham notes. Transients are hard to
avoid because
they may stem from surges elsewhere‑in a
neighbor's house
or even power lines up the street.
Little research
has been conducted to untangle the potential
health impacts
of EMF characteristics other than field strength,
Graham notes,
and money for such EMF studies is all but drying
up. The two
major federal programs dedicated to financing
research on EMF
effects on health are slated to shut down in
October. A
program funded by electric utilities through the
Electric Power Research Institute
will also end this year.
One should
expect that "research on EMFs in the
will take a big
nose‑dive," says Graham. One ray of hope,
Liburdy notes,
comes from the recent proliferation of
government funds
for endocrine‑disrupting pollutants. While
magnetic fields
are a type of radiation, they functionally
resemble many
environmental pollutants that mimic hormones.
In fact, he
observes, EMFs may actually fit the definition of an
endocrine
disrupter better than these chemicals do. That's
because magnetic
fields appear to elicit their effects by acting
on and through
hormones, rather than as hormones.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Are EMFs
Hazardous to Our Health?
Can
electromagnetic fields (EMF) from power lines, home
wiring, airport
and military radar, substations, transformers,
computers and
appliances cause brain tumors, leukemia, birth
defects,
miscarriages, chronic fatigue, headaches, cataracts,
heart problems,
stress. nausea, chest pain, forgetfulness,
cancer and other health problems?
Numerous studies have
produced
contradictory results, yet some experts are convinced
that the threat
is real.
Dr. David
Carpenter, Dean at the
childhood
cancers come from exposure to EMFs. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
warns "There is reason
for
concern" and advises prudent avoidance". Martin Halper, the
EPA's Director
of Analysis and Support says "I have never seen
a set of
epidemiological studies that remotely approached the
weight of
evidence that we're seeing with EMFs. Clearly there is
something
here."
Concern over EMFs exploded
after Paul Brodeur wrote a series
of articles in
the New Yorker Magazine in June 1989. Because
of Paul
Brodeur's reputation. his articles had a catalytic effect
on scientists,
reporters and concerned people throughout the
world. In
November 1989, the Department of Energy reported
that "It
has now become generally accepted that there are,
indeed,
biological effects due to field exposure." The EMF issue
gained more
publicity in 1990 when alarming reports appeared
in Time, the
Wall Street Journal, Business Week and popular
computer
publications. ABC's Ted Koppel and CBS's Dan Rather
both aired
special segments on EMFs.
In addition to
the long‑term health concerns, buying a house
with high fields
will be an economic disaster. In a few years,
when power line
radiation is as well known as asbestos and
radon, a house with high fields will be
practically impossible to
sell. Already
there are hundreds of lawsuits regarding EMFs and
property
devaluation.
EPA Says the Threat Is Real
By 1990, over
one hundred studies had been conducted
worldwide. Of
these, at least two dozen epidemiological
studies on
humans indicated a link between EMFs and serious
health problems.
In response to public pressure, the
Environmental
Protection Agency IEPA) began reviewing and
evaluating the available literature. In
a draft report issued in
March 1990, the
EPA recommended that EMFs be classified as a
Class B
carcinogen‑‑‑a "probable human carcinogen and joined
the ranks of
formaldehyde, DDT, dioxins and PCBs.
After the EPA
draft report was released, utility, military and
computer
lobbyists came down hard on the EPA. The EPA's final
revision did NOT
classify EMFs as a Class B carcinogen Rather,
the following
explanation was added:"At this time such a
characterization
regarding the link between cancer and
exposure to EMFs
is not appropriate because the basic nature
of the
interaction between EMFs and biological processes
leading to
cancer is not understood " Curiously, this rather
unusual logic
appears on the same page as the following: "In
conclusion,
several studies showing leukemia, Iymphoma and
cancer of the
nervous system in children exposed to supported
by similar
findings in adults in several/ occupational studies
also involving
electrical power frequency exposures, show a
consistent pattern of
response that suggest a causal link. "
When questioned
about the contradictory nature of these
statements, the
EPA responded that it was "not appropriate" to
use the probable
carcinogen label until it could demonstrate
how EMFs caused
cancer and exactly how much EMF is harmful.
This explanation
does not satisfy many critics who claim that
the EPAs upper
management was influenced by political and
economic
considerations exerted by utility, computer and
military
lobbyists.
How Do I Measure
EMFs?
A Gauss is a
common unit of measurement of magnetic field
strength. A
Gauss meter is an instrument which measures the
strength of
magnetic fields. Inside a Gauss meter there is a
coil of thin
wire, typically with hundreds of turns. As a magnetic
field radiates
through the coil, it induces a current, which is
amplified by the
circuitry inside the Gauss meter.
Gauss meters may
vary in the strength of the magnetic field
they are capable
of measuring. A meter used for measuring
EMFs from power
lines, transformers, substations and
appliances
around the home, for example, should be able to
measure as low as .1 mg.
Gauss meters
vary widely in price and accuracy. Meters have
either a single
axis coil or a triple axis coil. Single axis meters
are much simpler
than triple axis meters to manufacture and
thus, are less
expensive. To use a single axis meter you must
point the
meter's one sensor in three directions‑‑‑the x, y and z
axis. Then, you combine the
three readings in a mathematical
equation to
calculate the combined field strength. Obviously,
its far easier
and more accurate to use a 3‑axis meter. Triple
axis Gauss
meters are quite accurate, but they are also more
expensive.
Another thing to
watch out for when purchasing or renting a
Gauss meter is whether or not it
is frequency weighted. Most
meters will read
the same EMF strength no mater what the
frequency. As
the human body appears to be sensitive to both
the field strength
biological
purposes should be "frequency weighted". This
means that if
the field is different than 60 Hz the meter will
consider the
frequency and use it in calculating and displaying
the EMF's
strength. This feature is why frequency weighted
meters will show
a higher EMF reading than those meters
typically used
by electricians and engineers.
Power Lines
An enormous
amount of electricity is created at power
generating stations and sent
across the country through wires
that carry high
voltages. All power lines radiate
electromagnetic
fields. The question is: how much are the
power lines near YOUR
home radiating? The amount of EMFs
coming from a
power line depends on its particular
configuration.
Power companies know which power line
configurations are best
for reducing EMFs but most don't feel
the evidence
supports costly changes in the way they deliver
electricity.
Substations
A substation is
an assemblage of circuit breakers,
disconnecting
switches and transformers designed to
substations have
been blamed for causing cancer clusters
among nearby
residents. Paul Brodeur wrote about several such
cancer clusters
in the
Magazine.
Transformers
A key component
of a utility's electrical distribution network
depends upon
numerous, small transformers mounted on power
poles. A
transformer looks like a small metal trash can, usually
cylindrical.
Even when the electrical service is underground, you
will often see a
metal box (usually square} located on the
ground near the street.
Many people don't realize that when
they see a
transformer, the power line feeding the transformer
is 4000 to
13,800 volts. The transformer then reduces the
voltage to the
120/240 volts needed by nearby homes. Since
these
transformers can be seen in almost every neighborhood,
they are a
source of concern.
EMFs near a
transformer can be quite high, but due to its small
structure, the
field strength diminishes rapidly with distance,
as it does from
any point source. For this reason, having a
transformer
located near your home is usually not a major
source of
concern, although just to make sure, everyone should
measure the
field strength around it.
Home Wiring
If your home has
high EMF readings, it is important to
determine the
sources of the EMF so that remedial action can
be taken, if
possible. Many times a particular room will have a
higher EMF
reading. Check to see if the electricity is coming
into the house
on the wall outside that room. When this is the
case, it is
usually a good idea to block off that room and only
use it for
storage purposes.
Sometimes, the
source of a high magnetic field is incorrect
wiring. If you
suspect that your home is wired improperly,
obtain the
services of a licensed electrician. Warning: Do not
touch electric wires,
even if you think the current is turned off.
If you need to
disconnect electrical circuits to determine the
source of
magnetic fields, you should call a licensed electrician.
Computers
Computers are a
complicated subject. Know this: EMFs radiate
from all sides
of the computer. Thus, you must not only be
concerned with sitting in front of the
monitor but also if you are
sitting near a
computer or if a computer is operating in a
nearby room. The
Swedish safety standard, effective 711/90,
specifies a maximum of
0.25 mG at 50 cm from the display.
Many US
manufactured computers have EMFs of 5 ‑ 100 mG at
this distance.
And know this too: the screens placed over
monitors do NOT
block EMFs. Not even a lead screen will block
ELF and VLF
magnetic fields.
Space does not
permit a more thorough discussion of
computers. If
you use a computer, it is important that you
measure your EMF
exposure with a Gauss meter and review the
literature
concerning the health impacts of computer use.
Electric
Blankets and Waterbeds
Electric
blankets create a magnetic field that penetrates about
6‑7 inches
into the body. Thus it is not surprising that an
epidemiological
study has linked electric blankets with
miscarriages and
childhood leukemia. This pioneering work was
performed by Dr.
Nancy Wertheimer and Ed Leeper, who
originally
discovered that magnetic fields were linked to
childhood
leukemia. Similar health effects have been noted
with users of
many electric blankets and waterbed heaters will
emit EMFs even
when turned off. The devices must be
unplugged to
delete the EMF exposure Additionally, there is the
issue regarding
the vibrations that are generated by sleeping
on standing
water. There is less hard data in this area but
some experts are
concerned about the consequences.
Electric Clocks
Electric clocks
have a very high magnetic field, as much as 5 to
10 mG up to
three feet away. If you are using a bedside clock,
you are probably
sleeping in an EMF equivalent to that of a
powerline
Studies have linked high rates of brain tumors with
chronic exposure
to magnetic fields, so it is wise to place all
clocks and other
electrical devices (such as telephones and
answering
devices) at least 6 feet from your bed.
Fluorescent
Lights
Fluorescent lights produce much more
EMFs than incandescent
bulbs. A typical
fluorescent lamp of a office
ceiling have
readings of 160 to 200 mg 1 inch away.
Microwave Ovens and Radar
Microwave ovens
and radar from military installations and
airports emit
two types of radiation‑‑microwave and ELF.
Microwaves are
measured in milliwatt per centimeter squared
(mW/cm2) As of
exposure is 1
mW/cm2, down from a previous 10 mW/cm2. The
Russian safety
limit is .01 mW/cm2. As all microwave ovens
leak and exceed
the Russian safety limit, microwave ovens
have been
outlawed in
studies have shown that normal
microwave cooking coverts
food protein
molecules into carcinogenic substances.
When measuring
microwaves from military and airport radar
sources, 100% accurate
readings can only be found
with extremely
expensive digital peak‑hold meters. Why?
Because analog
devices begin to drop their reading
immediately after the radar
sweep passes. Thus, while an
analog meter can
show whether or not you are being exposed
to radar EMFs,
analog meters can't show your true exposure.
Although thousands
of dollars to purchase, digital‑hold meters
capable of
accurately detecting radar EMFs can be rented for
several hundred
to over a thousand dollars per month.
Telephones and
Answering Machines
Telephones can
emit surprisingly strong EMFs, especially from
the handset.
This is a problem because we hold the telephone
so close to our
head. Place the Gauss meter right against the
ear piece and
the mouth piece before buying a phone. Some
brands emit no
measurable fields and others emit strong fields
that travel
several inches....right into your brain. Answering
machines,
particular those with adapter plugs
(mini‑transformers),
give off high levels of EMFs.
Electric Razors
and Hair Dryers
Electric razors
and hair dryers emit EMFs as high as 200 to 400
mG. This seems
alarming, but we don't know if this is worse (or
better) than a
chronic exposure to a 2‑3 mG field. Some EMF
consultants
recommend that hair dryers not be used on children
as the high fields are
held close to their rapidly developing
brain and
nervous system.
Prudent
Avoidance
Electricity is
an inseparable part of our modern day society.
This means that
EMFs will continue to be all around us. But as
Discover
Magazine postulated, aside from making our life
easier, is
electricity also making our lives shorter?
Most experts
agree that limited, non‑chronic exposure to EMFs
is not a threat.
For example, it is probably acceptable for a
person to be near a toaster in the
morning. BUT, it is not
advisable for a
person to sleep under an electric blanket, up
close, live near
a powerline/substation, and sleep in a room
where the power
enters the home. This person is under an
extreme case of
chronic exposure. This condition,
unfortunately,
applies to millions of Americans.
If you wish to follows the
EPA's advice and practice "prudent
avoidance"
then the following advice is offered:
Measure your
home, work and school environments with a
Gauss meter Measure
EMFs both inside and outside your home.
Don't let your
children play near power lines, transformers,
radar domes and
microwave towers. Avoid areas where the field
is above 1 mG.
Measure the EMFs from appliances both when
they are
operating and when they are turned off. Some
appliances (like
TVs) are still drawing current even when they
are off.
Don't sleep
under an electric blanket or on a waterbed. If you
insist on using
these, unplug them before going to bed (don't
just turn it
off). Even though there is no magnetic field when
they are turned
off, there may still be a high electric field.
Don't sit too
close to your TV set. Distance yourself at least 6
feet away. Use a
Gauss meter to help you decide where it is
safe to sit.
Rearrange your
office and home area so that you are not
exposed to EMFs
from the sides/backs of electric appliances
and computers.
In the home, it is best that all major electrical
appliances, such
as computers, TVs, refrigerators etc, be placed
up against
outside walls. That way you are not creating an EMF
field in the
adjoining room.
Don't sit too
close to your computer. Computer monitors vary
greatly in the
strength of their EMFs, so you should check yours
with a meter.
Don't stand close to your microwave oven. Move
all electrical appliances at least 6
feet from your bed. Eliminate
wires running
under your bed. Eliminate dimmers and 3‑way
switches.
Be wary of cordless
appliances such as electric toothbrushes
and razors. You
may choose not to wear a quartz‑analog watch
because it
radiates pulsating EMFs along your acupuncture
meridians. An older mechanical windup
watch would be an
acceptable
alternative. It is also recommended to wear as little
jewelry as
possible and to take it off at night. Many people
have metal sensitivity
which can be aggravated by placing it
right on the
skin. Measure with a gauss meter to be sure. And
last, but not
least, always always always remember that EMFs
pass right
through walls. The EMF you are reading on your
Gauss meter
could be radiating from the next room...or from
outside your
home.
Additional Radiation
Info:
Eyeglass frames
should ideally be made from plastic with no
wires in them,
otherwise they can serve as an antenna to focus
the radio and cellular phone waves
directly into your brain.
What EMF Level
Is Safe?
There's a heated
debate as to what electromagnetic field (EMF)
level is
considered safe. Since the experts have not come to an
consensus,
you'll have to decide for yourself... Many
government and
utility documents report the usual ambient
level of 60‑Hz magnetic
field to be 0.5 mG. Thus, any reading
higher than 0.5
mG is above the "usual" ambient exposure.
Many experts and
public officials, as well as the few
governments that have
made an effort to offer public
protection, have
adopted the 3 mG cutoff point. The EPA has
proposed a
safety standard of 1 mG.
maximum safety
limit of 1 mG.
Dr. Robert
Becker, an MD who has been studying the effects of
EMFs for 20
years, states a lmG safety limit in his book Cross
Currents. When
electricians try to solve a magnetic field
problem they do
their best to drop the level to 1 mG or below.
Dr. Nancy
Wertheimer, a Ph.D. epidemiologist who has been
studying EMFs
for 20 years, has been looking at the
epidemiological
data in a different way‑‑she is trying to
associate EMF
levels with
health rather
than disease. The level she is coming up with is a
cut off of 1 mG.
Russian researchers claim that 1/1000ths of a
mG should be the
standard.
The BioElectric Body
believes that there are several stages of
health between
"optimum wellness", "degenerative disease"
and
"Cancer". Thus, we maintain our own living and sleeping
quarters at
0.5mG and below.
Recommended
Cross Currents
The Perils of Electropollution. The Promise of
Electromedicine
Robert 0. Becker, M.D. Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc.,
1990
Currents of
Death The Attempt to Cover Up the Threat to Your
Health Paul Brodeur
Simon and Schuster, 1989
Electromagnetic
Man Health & Hazard in the Electrical
Environment
Cyril W. Smith &
Inc. 1989
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&