Subject: Re What does radar due to people? (fwd)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 044041 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 21:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: marjorie lundquist
To: "Roy L. Beavers"
Subject: Re: What does radar due to people? (fwd)
Radar probably does the same thing to people that it does to other
mammals: increases the rate at which they get cancer. The U.S. Air
Force has sponsored two lifetime studies of rodents exposed to pulsed
radio frequency radiation: rats to 2.45 GHz and mice to 435 MHz. In
both experiments the total number of cancers was higher in the exposed
animals than in the controls.
The Air Force has fiercely resisted accepting that this was evidence
of a greater hazard to the exposed rodents and has even tried to
suppress or misrepresent the data from the mouse experiment. (The Air
Force has looked at data on a tissue-by-tissue basis, found no
evidence of a statistically significant difference, and blandly
asserted that the experiments showed no evidence of any hazard from
the radiation.) By looking at data on a tissue-by-tissue basis, the
statistical power of the experiment is greatly reduced, meaning that
the experiment then is insensitive to any except large differences,
because it can't "see" them! But if all the cancer data are combined,
without regard to the tissue in which it appeared, then the
statistical power of the experiment is much larger, and it CAN "see"
pretty small differences! It is scientifically sound to combine the
data in this way, in my judgment. So I consider that both these
experiments demonstrate that there IS a cancer hazard associated with
such exposure. (The scientists at the FDA's Center for Devices and
Radiological Health also think as I do on this point.)
Add to this the fact that epidemiological studies have shown that
there is a greater incidence of disease in the vicinity of airports,
and that studies of career people in the AIr Force have shown an
increasing risk of cancer, according to the length of their service,
and it is pretty clear that there really IS a cancer risk associated
with the chronic exposure of ANY mammal to a radar signal.
How large is the risk? Well, a rough estimate is that the risk of
getting cancer is tripled. The risk is pretty low to begin with, so
even a tripled risk is low on a year-to-year basis. But over a
lifetime, it can make a difference!
Of course, there are other health hazards than cancer to be concerned
about, in my judgment. One is early onset of Alzheimer's disease. I
know of no way to estimate this risk from RF exposure at present.
Sorry the news is bad, but this is the reality as I see it. --
Marjorie Lundquist
*********************************
Marjorie Lundquist, Ph.D., C.I.H.
Bioelectromagnetic Hygienist
P. O. Box 11831
Milwaukee, WI 53211-0831 USA
*********************************
>
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