Subject:  Re GSM transgenic mice study (Royds)(Philips).
Date:     Sat, 16 Sep 2000 081524 -0500
From:     Roy Beavers 
To:       guru 
--------------------------------------------------

..........From EMF-L.........

We must learn to accept "good confirmation" rather than insist on so-called
"replication" -- says Alasdair.....  Good advice!!!  That is as true in
most of "life" -- also -- is it not???.......guru..........

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: GSM transgenic mice study (Royds).
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:21:47
From: Alasdair Philips 
To: roy@emfguru.com

I don't have a problem with the 24 months (I see this a better!) but wait
to see protocol. The original exposure system was rather dubious, producing
mainly far-field plane wave exposure rather than near-field inductive
exposure. It is impossble to truly replicate unless you do it in the same
lab in the same position with the same equipment and an identical batch of
rats or mice. Ted Litovitz's work showed how supposedly identical chickens
produce eggs with a great variability in EMF sensitivity so so called
replications were actually far from it.

No, good confirmation is all we can realistically hope for and, indeed, can
be better if small shortcomings can be reduced. However, we need to challenge
people like Repacholi et al to accept confirmations rather than true
replications.

Alasdair

At 10:26 15/09/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>........Science request from EMF-L........
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: GSM transgenic mice study
>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:16:51 +0100
>From: "John Royds" 
>To: 
>References: <39C17347.E93FC85F@emfguru.com>
>
>Roy:
>
>I am concerned about the replication of Repacholi's transgenic mice GSM
>microwave study.
>
>Repacholi told Senator Allison's EMR Committee in Australia (31st August
>2000) that in his study:
>
>"We only did 18 months, and the reason for doing 18 months was because we
>did not want to have the diseases that occur with age.  In the last six
>months you get all sorts of age related diseases occurring, which can
>CONFUSE THE RESULTS, so we wanted to have a look at 18 months when they were
>relatively healthy, and we could just concentrate on what we wanted to do".
>[CAPITALS ADDED].
>
>But Repacholi told the committee that the replication (or as he termed it
>"confirmation of a result") is for the full 24 months.  Is this a deliberate
>ploy by the cellular phone industry to "CONFUSE THE RESULTS"?
>
>best wishes,
>
>John Royds
>Timmore House
>Newcastle
>Greystones
>Co. Wicklow
>Republic of Ireland
>tel/fax:  +353-1-281 9283
>email:  royds@esatclear.ie
>
>
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alasdair Philips,   BSc(Eng), DAgE, MIAgE
Director, UK Powerwatch, (aphilips@gn.apc.org)
EMC Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher
   http://www.powerwatch.org.uk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com