Subject: (DePippo) EMF insurance (fwd) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 004758 -0600 (CST) From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org> To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org> -------------------------------------------------- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 22:41:04 EST From: PDepippo@aol.com To: w-m-a@reach.net Subject: Re: Re ( DePippo) EMF insurance Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:25:12 -6000 Resent-From: "Wolfgang W. Scherer "Resent-To: rbeavers@llion.org Wolfgang, To be very specific, Swissre is claiming that as of the time of their publication ('97) that there was no conclusive proof of a hazard and in fact based their recommendation to the insurance industry on the public perception of their being a hazard. They, very clearly, give credence to the public's fear, so much so that legal battles could be / would be swayed in favor this public outcry. For me personally, after reading the document, it was clear that Swissre sees the handwriting on wall and are covering their ass. Thanks for asking the questions to the group. I'm very interested to hear what other professionals have to say. Peter In a message dated 3/13/99 8:04:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, w-m-a@reach.net writes: << Hi Roy since we have lawyers on our list I would like to ask them the following In Peter's response he points to the exclusion of EMF effects in insurances also that then such coverage can be bought at higher cost. Since insurance is a regulated business the exclusion of risks needs in my understanding a legal reasoning - the insurance industry provides the answer offering coverage at higher cost therefore ESTABLISHING "legally" EMF effects as a higher risk than other factors - sanctioned by the regulating agency - government. Now even a government cannot have it both ways by allowing for such "special" insurance the government itselfs recognizes a special "higher" risk - and can therefore no longer uphold the "low or no risk" approach on behalf of the industry - To me this is the only "logical" conclusion but we are on Earth - not on Volcan territory. Can someone sort out the legal implications ???? Anyway we will see what "word twisting" occurs now. Greetings Wolfgang >> 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