Subject:  Re Australian Standards (fwd)
Date:     Tue, 27 Oct 1998 083424 -0600 (CST)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To:       emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------



.......Some time ago, David Mercer sent me the following message
which (as I say below) I held up in order to provide the discussion
some "reinforcement."  The pressure of events here continues to
plague me, so I have not been able to prepare my intended remarks.
(I'll get them in.)......

In the meantime, David has again asked me about forwarding it???
Yes, this discussion is overdue, and I do apologize to David for not
forwarding it sooner......guru......

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 08:53:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" 
To: David_Mercer@uow.edu.au
Cc: emfguru 
Subject: Re: Australian Standards (fwd)

David:

Your message below is excellent!  I will be forwarding it....
I want to work a bit on an addition, first.

Cheerio....

Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
rbeavers@llion.org..............http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html
................................It is better to light a single candle ...
than to curse the darkness...............................................


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 11:28:15 +0000
From: David mercer 
To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
Subject: Re: Australian Standards (fwd)

Dear Roy,
Considering the Australian Standards seem to have become an object of
discussion. I thought it was a good opportunity to sing the praises of various
individuals and community groups who have been fighting for some time to get
more sensible EMF/RF policies in Australia. Lynn Ward and John Lincoln from
EMRAA in Sutherland( the region between Sydney and Wollongong)  have  done a
good job in recent years following up the work of people like Betty Venables
and Don Maisch( amongst many others). Recently there have been some
disagreements between various groups and individuals in Australia  regarding
the value of precautionary principles and prudent avoidance strategies. Some
are arguing that they are not worth pursuing at all, whilst others still see
them as a useful policy tool. In her email message Lyn Ward provides a
vignette of this debate when she suggets that Prudent Avoidance was hard to
argue for logically. I think this debate is sufficiently important for it be
discussed  more broadly amongst this email group.
Perhaps people could share their thoughts and experiences on the relative
value of different approaches  to RF/MW/EMF regulation.
 Cheers, 
 David Mercer, Science and Technology Studies, University Of Wollongong,
Australia.   









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