Subject: Re GSM transgenic mice study (Royds)(Fist)(Marsalek).
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 055028 -0500
From: Roy Beavers
To: guru
--------------------------------------------------
.........Response from EMF-L........
The "Conspiracy Theory!!"....... guru says: It is no wonder that people
think of their governments as "conspiratorial" -- that is the way the
governments behave............
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: GSM transgenic mice study (Royds)(Fist).
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 07:36:15 +0200
From: Eva Marsalek
To: roy@emfguru.com, fist@ozemailcom.au,"mosgoeller wilhelm univ.prof.dr."
,"hutter hans-peter di dr. med"
,"oberfeld gerd dr. med" ,
"carl bernhard mag." ,pinezits johann
References: <39C2E5BC.BF0DEF07@emfguru.com>
For me it seems clear:
Replication of the 50 Hz-study is not necessary because the result was the
desired one, and the lymphoma-study has to be reproduced so late as possible
and under other conditions that scientists can tell us years and years that
the results are not reproduced and that we have to wait until they talk about
some risk.....and if the replication of the study is not under the same
conditions, it is always better, because in the case that you have similar
results, you can say that the replication-conditions were not identical and
so it is not a really replication of the first study, so you have to
replicate both studies now.....and the play continues.....
And during the time while you are waiting for replication, you can install
mobile-phone-base-stations all over the world, you can sell umts-licences,
and you can tell the people that you have no serious study showing some
negative effect......
So "every body" is using a cell-phone (look at the selling rates in China
.....or at the marketing strategies in Austria: handys are offered as gifts
when you buy something or you even receive money for future connections when
you "buy" a cellphone for zero Schillings !) and you will have the same
situation like cigarettes and cars: when it will be agreed that there is a
risk, every body is "forced" or "willing" to accept it, because:
Governements cannot do much because they earned a lot of money by selling
licences, people are habituated to the use (children are growing up with
this technigue....) and will not miss the confort or are forced to use
handys for ex. in their work...........
And "the people" are paying the bill while the industry is earning......
like the governments........
Congratulations!
eva marsalek, vienna, austria
Roy Beavers schrieb:
> .......Response from EMF-L........
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: GSM transgenic mice study (Royds).
> Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 12:59:22 +1100
> From: Stewart Fist
> Reply-To: fist@ozemail.com.au
> Organization: Independent writer and columnist
> To: roy@emfguru.com
> References: <39C23F9E.BD85C1FE@emfguru.com>
>
> On the question of the Adelaide Hospital replication:
>
> 1. mice need to be a few months old before the exposure begins.
>
> 2. not all mice are in the same stages of exposure. Some may be a year old
> and have 9 months of exposure, while others may be 18 months old and have 15
> months of exposure.
>
> 3. Scientists always try to isolate their experimental animal so only one
> factor is involved, so there's a good argument for not continuing studies past
> the point where the mice begin to suffer all sorts of age-related illnesses
> and condictions which can confuse the science BUT:
>
> 4. It is also true that R/F potentially creates age-related effects.
>
> This is the dilemma of the scientist, and why he can't answer all the
> questions being asked with one single experiment. We need both, at a minimum.
>
> And since cancers generally have an incubation period longer than 18 months,
> we can see why it was necessary to use lymphoma-prone mice to get any
> meaningful results at all. (You'd need at least 2000 normal mice in each
> exposed or control group to get the same statistical results as 100
> lymphoma-prone mice)
>
> The questions that should be asked is:
>
> 1. Why is no independent research along the same lines being done in the USA?
> 2. Why wasn't this replication initiated immediately the findings became known
> (to the scientists, that was two years before the research was announced in public)?
> 3. What is the explanation for the high level of B-cell lymphomas? And why
> has this been played down, when it is obviously highly significant?
> 4. Why didn't Repacholi's team autopsy the remaining live mice at the end of
> the first Adelaide Hospital trial -- to at least see if there was a higher
> level of early-stage lymphomas?
> 5. Why didn't they also repeat their 50Hz Mains Power study when they found
> dose-related kidney disease.
> 6. Why did they publicly promote the idea that this 50Hz study "proved mains
> power to be safe", when the only significant finding was that it didn't appear
> to promote lymphomas -- and even that was dubious given the mixed results with
> kidney deaths, etc.
> 7. Why was no-effect seen as highly significant in the 50Hz study, but a
> 2.4-times increase in lymphoma played down, and said to need replication
> before it could be accepted as valid?
> If one needs validation by replication, doesn't the other?
>
> --
> Stewart Fist - writer and columnist
> See http://www.australianIT.com.au/opinion/crossroads/
> http://www.abc.net.au/http/sfist/ (some archives)
> http://www.electric-words.com (main archives)
> 70 Middle Harbour Road, Lindfield, 2070, N.S.W, Australia
> Phone +61 2 9416 7458 Fax +61 2 9416 4582
--
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com