Subject:  Re NCI Release New Powerline Study (R)
Date:     Thu, 3 Jul 1997 103138 -0500 (CDT)
From:     Jan Hoekstra <yankee@cyburban.com>
To:       Multiple recipients of list <emf-l@mail.llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------

Dear Michelle
This the last one, I won't bother you . It's just to show that I had some
incling of the absurdity of the NYtimes article... Jan

At 10:49 PM 7/2/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Emrall@aol.com wrote:
>
>>     A new childhood leukemia/powerline study, to be published July 3rd in
The
>> New England Journal of Medicine, rather than spelling the death knell to
EMF
>> research that the editorial accompanying the study demands, acknowledges
in
>> no less than four places, a statistically significant increase in acute
>> lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in children exposed to powerline magnetic
fields
>> in excess of 3 mG.
>
>   Wasn't it about a year ago that the New England Journal of Medicine
>revealed to us that there was no indication that silicone breast
>implants could rightly be implicated in the health problems experienced
>by numerous women who had undergone silicone breast implant surgery?
>When courts essentially rejected this claim of no fault and awarded
>damages to plaintiffs, a representative of New England Journal expressed
>outrage that, essentially, the position of this journal was not taken as
>the final word in that matter. Those statements were documented in a
>film made for Frontline by Jon Palfreman, who also produced the infamous
>"Currents of Fear". Briefly, it is my view that the New England Journal
>is not deserving of the status which it appears to demand for the simple
>reason that its editorial position seems altogether too responsive to
>political considerations and is clearly prepared to present the kinds of
>half-truths and distortions commonly referred to as propaganda.
>   Capsule reviews which mislead are quite commonly found in materials
>of appeal to physicians as they are quite busy and tend to take these
>things typically at face value. For an excellent example of such
>sleight-of-pen red herring techniques IMO, see the compilation of
>research critiques assembled by biologist Dr. John Moulder of the
>Medical College of Wisconsin. This is distributed to physicians who
>express an interest in the EMF/health issues. A casual glance at this
>document will assure them that there is nothing of concern in any of the
>research which would suggest health risks!
>>
>>     RESIDENTIAL EXPOSURE TO MAGNETIC FIELDS AND ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC
LEUKEMIA
>> IN CHILDREN  is a positive study showing an increase in the development
of
>> ALL in children exposed to powerline magnetic fields, masquerading as a
>> negative study as a result of the National Cancer Institute's negative
spin
>> on the study's findings.  The National Cancer Institute's mantra of "EMF
>> research should stop here" does a disservice to the public who look to it
for
>> honest reporting of research findings, not slanted editorializing.
>
>>     The authors have chosen to declare their findings negative when in
fact,
>> the study shows a doubling of ALL in children exposed to 3 mG powerline
>> magnetic fields.
>
>   This is all very curious. Who funds the National Cancer Institute? As
>Roy says, follow the money! When politics and medicine mix, the
>resulting brew truly stinks. Remember that cancer treatment and research
>represent a multi-billion dollar industry. In comparison, the well-being
>of people is of little apparent concern and we've seen this demonstrated
>with regularity across a broad spectrum of issues.
>
>
>


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