Subject: (Philips) Re (Beavers) regulation, (Scherer) (Seitz) (fwd)
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 070728 -0600 (CST)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 10:39:58
From: Alasdair Philips
To: "Roy L. Beavers" , emfguru
Subject: Re: (Beavers) regulation, (Scherer) (Seitz)
Roy
I completely agree with your stance. The problem is what and how to
measure and not what "imaginative" number to pull out of the air as
a safety factor. The UK NRPB guidance limits (which are among the
highest in the world now) ARE probably appropriate for THERMAL effects
which is what ALL national and international guidance is currently
based on.
The Director of the NRPB is on TV record as saying (in 1994) that IF
they start to recognise non-thermal effects (which WE all know exist)
then they would have to reduce their numbers by orders of magnitude -
a factor of 8000 was stated for 50/60 Hz electricity magnetic fields.
But he also went on to say that such a 'safety factor' picked out of
the air an applied to thermally derived limits would be meaningless.
I agree with him there, although I think that there is now plenty of
good peer-reviewed science showing the sort of levels non-thermal
bio-effects occur doen to to enable us to start setting provisional
non-thermal guidance levels.
The point I am trying to emphasise is that is is inappropriate to choose
large safety margins to protect against a different type of threat than
the current guidance has been set to protect against. It isn't sensible
or logical. The thermal science is valid for thermal effects.
We now need to agree on provisional non-thermal guidance levels for
scientific and epidemiological reasons and not just increase some
mythical 'safety factor'.
Alasdair
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alasdair Philips (aphilips@gn.apc.org)
Director, UK Powerwatch,
EMC Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At 15:57 19/02/99 -0600, Roy L. Beavers wrote:
>Wolfgang:
>
>I have no argument with the importance of numbers ... when they are
>based on valid science......
>
>At this time, though, we are getting numbers that are guesses....
>And we (they, everybody) soon forget that they are guesses ... and begin
>to believe in them....
>
>We simply don't have any valid, usable numbers now! And to try and
>bluff it through (as if we did) is to invite the kind of "how many angels
>can dance on the head of a pin" arguments that the technicians love.....
>
>BUT, which cause ***governments*** to avoid doing anything!!!.....
>
>Except, perhaps, shake their heads at scientists who "never can agree" on
>anything.... In the meantime, government has a good excuse to postpone
>ACTION again!!....
>
>Oh, they may fund another "five year" plan that would mainly provide an
>excuse to do nothing ... salve consciouses ... while nothing of importance
>toward protecting the public takes place.... (That clearly was one of the
>purposes of RAPID!!!! I noted that every time someone (me!) would suggest
>that the public needed to be told -- the response was "Wait!" -- "Wait
>until the study is finished.....") HEY!!! We are STILL waiting.......
>
>Such study projects may make everyone "feel" good -- "feel" like we are
>doing something -- but it is really to finesse the problem ... to postpone
>it..... Which plays right into the industry's plans!!!!!!!
>
>GURU SAYS:
>
>We know enough now to be able to confidently say: AVOID EMF/EMR exposure
>to the maximum extent reasonable/possible..... Legislation of the
>following general nature will work!!!
>
>---Prohibit--- the construction of power lines into residential
>neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, etc.!!! (The 100 meter separation
>recommended in Sweden is a suitable start on that -- if it were legislated
>and enforced!!!!
>.....Perhaps 200 meters should be required in the case 500kV lines or
>greater....)
>
>---Prohibit--- the construction of telecom, television, radar,
>microwave transmitters or antennas, etc., within three -3-!! miles of
>residences, population centers, etc.
>
>---Require--- warning labels (explanations) on all EMF/EMR sources, e.g.,
>cell-phones, microwave ovens, hair dryers, etc....
>
>It doesn't need to be complicated. The simpler you make it the better!!!
>(KISS - keep it simple stupid -- is a good idea when legislating or when
>trying to educate the public or the congress about a problem like this.)
>
>WITHOUT SUCH LEGISLATION, however, IT WILL NEVER WORK.....NOTHING WILL
>WORK......
>
>Cheerio....
>
>Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
>rbeavers@llion.org................
>...It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness...
>.................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS...............
>
>On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Wolfgang W. Scherer wrote:
>
>> Roy
>> the reasoning in Salzburg mentioned in this message
>> shows why we need more research and data
>>
>> the political approach was - as we learned - to take a specific
>> "safety" margin of 500 times below the established data.
>>
>> While they could have taken with the same reasoning - as said - a
>> 10 000 times margin, the agreement with the industry maybe the
>> reason for the 500 "only".
>>
>> While all EMF"purist" and scientific minds may scoff at such
>> cumbersome mathematics this is how "politics" in reality work.
>>
>> That is why I said back then we NEED numbers
>> ( better ones, new ones, lower ...)
>> without we have no chance. q.e.d.
>>
>> Greetings
>> Wolfgang
>> Wolfgang W. Scherer
>>
>> http://www.reach.net/~scherer/p/
>>
>> Join the EMF mailing list contact Roy Beavers
>> rbeavers@llion.org
>> visit http://www.feb.se/
>>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alasdair Philips (aphilips@gn.apc.org)
Director, UK Powerwatch,
EMC Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html