To: undisclosed-recipients;
--------------------------------------------------
--------------C38C299ADE5D9F84F81D5D6A
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi everybody:
In his message below, Dr. Michael Kundi reminds us of an important point -- which
I think our long-time regular readers are well aware of, but which may easily be lost
by the newer readers or the less sophisticated EMF/bioeffects student.
Namely: The interaction of electromagnetic radiation (ALL of its various component
metrics, e.g., magnetic field, transients, frequency, etc.) with human cells and with
the environment surrounding us (e.g., ground currents or "stray voltage" as
well as the "aerosol effect" recently identified by Professor Henshaw at
Bristol Univ. in the U.K.) produces a wide variety of biological effects.
Certainly NOT just one!!!
It is most likely that not all of these effects have been identified!! And, it is clear
that
the few which are identified (e.g., melatonin or calcium responses or the blood brain
barrier) have not been sufficiently studied to enable us to reach any conclusions as to
which are the most harmful overall ... to human health.
As new research continues to uncover more knowledge in regard to the above, we
should avoid any tendency to jump upon the latest results and conclude that the latest
"smoking gun" is the explanation.
It is much more important to grasp the significance of the full extent of EMF/EMR
interaction with human cells and the surrounding environment in ALL of its
manifestations.....!!
It is also important to realize that the harmful effects we are slowly becoming
aware of ... may involve synergistic effects of the sum total of all the various
"mechanisms" of the EMF/EMR interaction with cells and the surrounding
environment......!!!
I think that is the beauty of the excellent point that is contained in the message below.
Guru says: The archives of EMF-L contain a number of references to this same point.
i.e.. The health effects are most likely the result of multiple interactions: of a
chemical
(biological) nature within our cells and organs -- either directly, or -- perhaps induced
via the environment........ (I believe this same observation may be first attributable
to
Robert Becker.)
.........guru........(signature line below)
Michael Kundi wrote:
> Dear Roy,
> The aerosol hypothesis of Henshaw and the supporting evidence from
> Preece's study should not let us forget about the magnetic field
> component. The wire code results taken as a whole do suggest a small but
> systematically elevated risk. What remains to be done is to do combined
> studies including measurements or estimates of the magnetic field in the
> homes and of charge distribution of particulate matter (PM2.5 or PM1 or
> even smaller). I suspect that some of the discrepancies between
> epidemiological findings could possibly be resolved by including
> Hanshaw's hypothesis. E.g. in Austria there is a regional difference in
> the orientation of high voltage lines (in some areas they are only
> south-north oriented and in others only east-west). If the hypothesis of
> Henshaw is correct, then because of predominant west-winds, only in
> areas with south-north orientation of power lines an association could
> be expected. If only distance is considered this would dilute the
> effect.
> Best,
> Michael
> --
> Department for Occupational and Social Hygiene
> Head:Univ.Prof.Dr.Michael Kundi
> Institute of Environmental Health
> University of Vienna, Austria
> Kinderspitalgasse 15
> A-1095 Wien
> Tel: +43-(0)1-40490 64726
> Fax: +43-(0)1-4277-9647
--
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.com
It is better to light a single candle
than to curse the darkness.....
WEBSITE: http://emfguru.com
People are more important than profit$$
--------------C38C299ADE5D9F84F81D5D6A
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi everybody:
In his message below, Dr. Michael Kundi reminds us of an important point
-- which
I think our long-time regular readers are well aware of, but which
may easily be lost
by the newer readers or the less sophisticated EMF/bioeffects student.
Namely: The interaction of electromagnetic radiation (ALL of its
various component
metrics, e.g., magnetic field, transients, frequency, etc.) with human
cells and with
the environment surrounding us (e.g., ground currents or "stray
voltage" as
well as the "aerosol effect" recently identified by Professor Henshaw
at
Bristol Univ. in the U.K.) produces a wide variety of biological
effects.
Certainly NOT just one!!!
It is most likely that not all of these effects have been identified!!
And, it is clear that
the few which are identified (e.g., melatonin or calcium responses
or the blood brain
barrier) have not been sufficiently studied to enable us to reach any
conclusions as to
which are the most harmful overall ... to human health.
As new research continues to uncover more knowledge in regard to the
above, we
should avoid any tendency to jump upon the latest results and conclude
that the latest
"smoking gun" is the explanation.
It is much more important to grasp the significance of the full extent
of EMF/EMR
interaction with human cells and the surrounding environment
in ALL of its
manifestations.....!!
It is also important to realize that the harmful effects we are slowly
becoming
aware of ... may involve synergistic effects of the sum total of
all the various
"mechanisms" of the EMF/EMR interaction with cells and the surrounding
environment......!!!
I think that is the beauty of the excellent point that is contained
in the message below.
Guru says: The archives of EMF-L contain a number of references
to this same point.
i.e.. The health effects are most likely the result of multiple
interactions: of a chemical
(biological) nature within our cells and organs -- either directly,
or -- perhaps induced
via the environment........ (I believe this same observation
may be first attributable to
Robert Becker.)
.........guru........(signature line below)
Michael Kundi wrote:
Dear Roy,
The aerosol hypothesis of Henshaw and the supporting evidence from
Preece's study should not let us forget about the magnetic field
component. The wire code results taken as a whole do suggest a small
but
systematically elevated risk. What remains to be done is to do combined
studies including measurements or estimates of the magnetic field in
the
homes and of charge distribution of particulate matter (PM2.5 or PM1
or
even smaller). I suspect that some of the discrepancies between
epidemiological findings could possibly be resolved by including
Hanshaw's hypothesis. E.g. in Austria there is a regional difference
in
the orientation of high voltage lines (in some areas they are only
south-north oriented and in others only east-west). If the hypothesis
of
Henshaw is correct, then because of predominant west-winds, only in
areas with south-north orientation of power lines an association could
be expected. If only distance is considered this would dilute the
effect.
Best,
Michael
--
Department for Occupational and Social Hygiene
Head:Univ.Prof.Dr.Michael Kundi
Institute of Environmental Health
University of Vienna, Austria
Kinderspitalgasse 15
A-1095 Wien
Tel: +43-(0)1-40490 64726
Fax: +43-(0)1-4277-9647
--
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.com
It is better to light a single candle
than to curse the darkness.....
WEBSITE: http://emfguru.com
People are more important than profit$$
--------------C38C299ADE5D9F84F81D5D6A--
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com