Subject: Re EMF/hearing problems (Kingsbury)..
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 062344 -0600 (CST)
From: "Roy L. Beavers"
To: emfguru
--------------------------------------------------
..........Courtesy of the EMF-L list......
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.com
.....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
NEW!!! Website
...................People are more important than profits.................
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:49:57 -0500
From: Bill Kingsbury
To: rbeavers@llion.org
Subject: Re: EMF/hearing problems
Roy,
Here are excerpts from three articles that reference the
"electrophonic effect of microwave hearing" -- and I haven't
searched (yet) for the specific term: "microwave hearing",
so there's likely much more information available.
..Bill
1) http://www.akut.org/emr_emf/Lai_austria1.htm
NEUROLOGICAL EFFECTS OF
RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION
Bioelectromagnetics Research Laboratory,
Department of Bioengineering, School of Medicine and College of
Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
Paper presented to the Workshop on possible biological and
health effects of RF electromagnetic fields.
Mobile Phones and Health, Symposium,
October 25-28, 1998, University of Vienna, Austria.
INTRODUCTION
Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RFR), a form of energy
between 10 KHz-300 GHz in the electromagnetic spectrum, is used
in wireless communication and emitted from antennae of mobile
telephones (handys) and from cellular masts. RFR can penetrate
into organic tissues and be absorbed and converted into heat.
One familiar application of this energy is the microwave ovens
used in cooking.
----
THERMAL AND NONTHERMAL EFFECTS
Another difficulty in eliminating the contribution of thermal
effects is that it can be 'micro-thermal'. An example of this is
the auditory effect of pulsed RFR. We can hear RFR delivered in
pulses. An explanation for this 'hearing' effect is that it is
caused by thermoelastic expansion of the head of the 'listener.'
In a classic paper by Chou et al. [1982], it was stated that
"... one hears sound because a miniscule wave of pressure is set up
within the head and is detected at the cochlea when the absorbed
microwave pulse is converted to thermal energy." The threshold of
hearing was determined to be approximately 10 microjoule/gm per
pulse, which causes an increment of temperature in the head of one
millionth of a degree centigrade! Lebovitz [1975] gives another
example of a microthermal effect of RFR on the vestibulocochlear
apparatus, an organ in the inner ear responsible for keeping body
balance and sensing of movement. He proposed that an uneven
distribution of RFR absorption in the head can set up a temperature
gradient in the semicircular canals, which in turns affect the
function of the vestibular system. The semicircular canals are
very minute organs in our body.
----
References cited:
Chou, C.K.; Guy, A.W.; Galambos, R. Auditory
perception of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields.
J Acoust Soc Am 71:1321-1334; 1982.
Lebovitz R.M. Detection of weak electromagnetic
radiation by the mammalian vestibulocochlear
apparatus. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 247:182-193; 1975.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2) http://www.reach.net/~scherer/p/biofx.htm
from Cellular Alert Canada:
http://www.reach.net/~scherer/p/cellalrt.htm
Selected excerpts to
Biological Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation
(revised 2.February 1996)
cut/condensed from
Biological Effects of Radiofrequency and Microwave Radiation:
Application, Hazards, and Safeguards.
by Wolfgang W. Scherer
(25.March 1994)
----
electrophonic effect
...... A special role is played by the electrophonic effect of
microwave hearing. Humans can perceive a buzzing or clicking sound
in the back of their heads at exposure to power densities as low as
0.1 mW/cm² of pulsed microwave radiation (200-3000 MHz), depending
on the pulse repetition frequency and the peak power density
(around 300 mW/cm²). The absorbed energy produces a thermoelastic
expansion of the brain tissue causing an acoustic pressure wave
which is detected in the cochlea by the hair cells of the organ of
Corti. The energy needed to produce this effect is so small that
it does not actually increase the mean temperature of the brain,
yet the acoustic sensation is strong enough to be clearly perceived
in an ambient noise level of circa 65 dB. Due to this fact
microwave hearing does not cause an apparent physical reaction
within the head, but it is well known that humans suffer general
stress reactions when they are exposed to higher levels of sound.
Noise cannot only be an annoyance, but when it consists of pulsed
sounds it affects heart beat and metabolic rates.[8] The
subliminal aspects of noise levels are here not even considered
despite the recognized physiological effects of acoustic noise.
It would be a very interesting field for research to probe the
subliminal acoustic effects of such exposure to low radio frequency
radiation. A possible link between such radiation and noise
related reactions, effects, or damages would be an aspect worth
of further investigation......
reference:
[8] Welch, Bruce L. & Annemarie S. et al. Physiological
effects of noise. New York, Plenum Press, 1970.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1997/fcc97303.wp
Federal Communications Commission - FCC 97-303
Petition for Rulemaking of the Cellular Telecommunications
Industry Association Concerning Amendment of the Commission's
Rules - to Preempt State and Local Regulation of Commercial
Mobile Radio Service Transmitting Facilities
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING
Adopted: August 25, 1997
----
[ Defeated: ]
26. The Cellular Phone Taskforce (Cellular Taskforce) states
that our guidelines should be modified to protect individuals who
are "electrosensitive."18 The Cellular Taskforce maintains that
such individuals are "hypersensitive" to non- ionizing
electromagnetic fields and that "perhaps 2%" of the population is
susceptible to becoming electrosensitive. The Cellular Taskforce
believes that the allowable limits for power density should be set
at 10 microwatts-per-squared-centimeter (mW/cm2) for all
frequencies above 100 MHz to protect against "non-thermal
bioeffects." In a separate petition, Dr. Marjorie Lundquist
suggests that the existence of non-thermal effects are
controversial, but claims that "the scientific consensus is
swinging in favor of their existence."19 The Cellular Taskforce
advocates a limit of 40 milliwatts-per-squared-centimeter (mW/cm2)
for peak power density to protect against "microwave hearing"
in the frequency range of 300 to 3000 MHz. Also, the Cellular
Taskforce suggests that limits for specific absorption rate (SAR)
should be revised to allow for different rates of absorption among
members of the public.
----
In reaching our decisions, we have considered carefully the
petitions and comments that were received in this proceeding.
We believe our decisions provide a proper balance between the
need to protect the public and workers from exposure to
potentially harmful RF electromagnetic fields and the requirement
that industry be allowed to provide telecommunications services
to the public in the most efficient and practical manner possible.
Specifically, we are:
1) affirming the RF exposure limits that were previously adopted;
2) modifying in a few areas our policy that categorically
excludes certain transmitters from routine environmental
evaluation; 3) revising and clarifying our guidelines regarding
RF emissions involving multiple transmitter operating at one
site; and 4) modifying our rules to extend the initial
transition period to October 15, 1997, and to require that all
existing facilities be brought into compliance with our new
guidelines within three years (by September 1, 2000). We are
also adopting a number of minor changes and clarifications.
----
The Ad-hoc Association also proposes that a new rule be adopted
requiring that an applicant demonstrate compliance, and provide
informational material to residents, schools and hospitals, in
each area within 1000 meters of their transmitting facility.
Similarly, the Cellular Taskforce urges that the rules be
modified to require routine environmental evaluation of all
transmitters, facilities and operations that are less than
2000 feet from any residence.38 The proposals from the
Cellular Taskforce and the Ad-hoc Association are opposed as
unnecessary and overly burdensome in comments filed by
Ameritech and AirTouch.39
[ Defeated ]
----
47. In general, we find no merit in the proposals of the
Ad-hoc Association and the Cellular Taskforce to narrow our
categorical exclusion rules, so that more transmitting facilities
are subject to routine environmental evaluation, and to require
applicants to provide informational material to nearby residents,
schools, and hospitals. Our calculations and analyses indicate
that those transmitting facilities that are categorically
excluded from routine evaluation should offer little or no
potential for exposure in excess of our limits.
----
.
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com