Subject: Larry King Live Program on Cell Phones and Health (Curry)..
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 002253 -0500
From: Roy Beavers
To: Roy Beavers
--------------------------------------------------
.....Bill Curry has forwarded (below) a copy of his comments to Larry King...
......Guru is going to take some time to prepare comments in depth...... I did
record the program...... Surely everyone who saw the program must have realized, however,
that Sam Milham was up against a **stacked deck.**
Bill Curry provides some insight to that below..... I feel there is much more to
be said about that...... Still, I also "had the feeling" that Larry King was
setting "them" up!!! The whole bunch of Moulder-like zombies..... Worst of
all -- the FDA zombie..... (Did you note his plaintive -- and hollow -- claim
of "independence" on the part of FDA? That was vomit stuff.......)
King kept coming back to the tobacco-similarity theme...... He is no dummy ...
AND he is no "hired gun"for the special interests....!!! I believe he is likely
to keep going after the story until he gets it.....
Realize that sam Milham is the only one in the bunch who had done any actual
EMF research himself!!! And he has been at it for more than fifteen years!!!
He was the only one who did not equivocate.............
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Larry King Live Program on Cell Phones and Health
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 22:43:35 -0500
From: "Bill P. Curry"
Reply-To: BPCurry@MCS.com
Organization: EMSciTek Consulting co.
To: Roy Beavers
Roy,
I tried to send a message to Larry King at CNN, but I had so much trouble
getting it onto the CNN Feedback server, that I am not sure it will make it to
him. In the hopes that he or someone associated with his program sees your
list, I would like to post the message here, if you approve. The message is
stated below:
Dear Larry King:
This is in regard to the Larry King Live program about cell phones and
cancer. I advise you to get the excellent review article by Dr. George Carlo
and associates that is online at Medscape.com. This web site was founded and
is edited by Dr. George Lundberg, former editor of the Journal of the American
Medical Association. Carlo's review is more objective than were your
pro-industry guests Drs. Erdreich and Moulder. Also, Dr. Ross Adey has long
insited that cell phone use by children is not advisable because of their
smaller brain sizes, rapid neuronal growth, and rapid hormonal changes. These
characteristics make them more vulnerable than adults if any brain tissue
damage occurs.
Also, the difference between having a cell phone next to your head and a
walkie-talkie is that the cell phone operates at a much higher frequency, and
the absorption of radiation by brain tissue increases dramatically with
frequency, because of the high water content of tissues. Also, the
walkie-talkie did not use pulsed radiation, as far as I know, and some
bioelectromagnetics scientists say that pulsed radiation is more harmful to
cells than steady radiation.
I am a retired scientist who used to be at Argonne National Lab. I
have MS in Physics and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering, and I have been educating
myself by talking with bioelectromagnetic researchers, reading papers, doing
field calculations, and making field measurements related to the potential
impact of cell phones on health and of cell phone towers on health for the
last three years.
I have some complaints about some of your panel members. I once went (at
considerable personal expense) to a meeting of the Radiation Research Society
in Louisville, Kentucky to hear two panels convened about cell phone safety by
Dr. Moulder. I was not allowed to ask any questions of the panel members (one
of whom was Dr. Erdreich) and I cornered some of them in the halls and asked
my questions. In my opinion, the panel was a stacked deck. Other researchers
(including Dr. Henry Lai at Univ. of Washington, Dr. Carl Blackman of EPA Lab
in North Carolina, Dr. Jerry Phillips, formerly at the Bioelectromagnetics Lab
at Loma Linda University Veterans Hospital, etc. who have found such adverse
biological effects from RF radiation as DNA breakage, DNA repair
insufficiency, and alteration of calcium ion transport rate across cell
membranes were not part of the panels. I also found out from the Motorolla
representative that the industry was not interested in establishing what
biological damage mechanisms there might be, but only interested in
demonstrating that cell phones are "safe." I maintain that you cannot get
objective scientific results with such a biased premise - i.e., that the
phones are "safe", and all we have to do is prove that.
Dr. Linda Erdreich has also defended the Air Force against claims that Pave
Paws radar is harmful to individuals in communities near such bases, in spite
of the fact that each radar pulse has 500,000 watts power at a frequency of
450 Mhz.
The Air Force argument is that the duty cyle is very low, so the radar's
average power is very low and cannot damage tissues. This argument assumes
that only cell heating by RF radiation can cause cell damage by non-ionizing
radiation. This argument is refuted by the last 10 years of
bioelectromagnetic research
indicating DNA damage, chromosome damage, blood brain barrier opening, etc. by
RF radiation at levels far lower than what the FCC says is safe. Even the
government's own Interagency Federal Working Group on RF Safety has criticized
the current standards and the way they are interpreted.
I enjoyed your program very much and I hope that you will continue to cover
this subject.
The eventual conclusions are not likely to be nearly so favorable to industry
as they tell the public, in my opinion.
--
----
Bill P. Curry, Ph.D. |Physics is fun.
EMSciTek Consulting Co. |Trying to make a living!
22W101 McCarron Road, |Phone: (630) 858-9377
Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 |Fax: (630) 858-9159 with prior notice
Web page: http://www.EMSciTek.com
____________________________________________________
| Analysis, experiment design & software development |
| for engineering and the physical sciences |
----------------------------------------------------
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com