| Author | Message | ||
| Cherylin Unregistered guest |
Anyone use a cell phone or live close to a cell phone tower? No wonder we are all becoming so susceptible to environmental toxins, including but not limited to, excitotoxins. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. Lord help us all!! http://www.emf-health.com/blog/2005_03_27_archive.html | ||
| Dianne Unregistered guest |
There seems to be some conflicting opinions but I found the following when searching on this topic. In a draft report issued in March 1990, the EPA recommended that EMFs (electromagnetic fields) be classified as a Class B carcinogen -- -a "probable human carcinogen and joined the ranks of formaldehyde, DDT, dioxins and PCBs. After the EPA draft report was released, utility, military and computer lobbyists came down hard on the EPA. The EPA's final revision did NOT classify EMFs as a Class B carcinogen Rather, the following explanation was added:" At this time such a characterization regarding the link between cancer and exposure to EMFs is not appropriate because the basic nature of the interaction between EMFs and biological processes leading to cancer is not understood." Curiously, this rather unusual logic appears on the same page as the following: "In conclusion, several studies showing leukemia, Iymphoma and cancer of the nervous system in children exposed to supported by similar findings in adults in several/ occupational studies also involving electrical power frequency exposures, show a consistent pattern of response that suggest a causal link. " When questioned about the contradictory nature of these statements, the EPA responded that it was "not appropriate" to use the probable carcinogen label until it could demonstrate how EMFs caused cancer and exactly how much EMF is harmful. This explanation does not satisfy many critics who claim that the EPAs upper management was influenced by political and economic considerations exerted by utility, computer and military lobbyists. |
