The MREC provides the following list of current resources on the topic of Electric and Magnetic Fields:
NEWS: UK regulatory agency finds Stetzer’s promotion of EMF-blocking product unfounded
Stetzer Electric Inc., one of WI’s well-known alternative stray voltage consultant, received a negative ruling in the UK. Advertisements of a product they claimed to “absorb dangerous dirty electricity from the wiring in buildings” were found by the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to be unsubstantiated and were ordered to be removed from publication. The ASA regulates UK ads to ensure they are truthful and socially responsible. All six objections filed against the claims, relating to such issues as the validity of supporting scientific documentation, third party certification, and patents, were upheld by the ASA. A summary of the ASA’s ruling can be seen here:
NEW PUBLICATION! Effects of low-level radio-frequency (3kHz to 300GHz) energy on human cardiovascular, reproductive, immune, and other systems: A review of the recent literature. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2007 Aug 8; Jauchem JR. Air Force Research Laboratory, Directed Energy Bioeffects Division, Radio Frequency Radiation Branch, 8262 Hawks Road, San Antonio, TX 78235-5147, USA
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Occupational or residential exposures to radio-frequency energy (RFE), including microwaves, have been alleged to result in health problems. A review of recent epidemiological studies and studies of humans as subjects in laboratory investigations would be useful. METHODS: This paper is a narrative review of the recent medical and scientific literature (from mid-1998 through early 2006) dealing with possible effects of RFE on humans, relating to topics other than cancer, tumors, and central nervous system effects (areas covered in a previous review). Subject areas in this review include effects on cardiovascular, reproductive, and immune systems. RESULTS: A large number of studies were related to exposures from cellular telephones. Although both positive and negative findings were reported in some studies, in a majority of instances no significant health effects were found. Most studies had some methodological limitations. Although some cardiovascular effects due to RFE were reported in epidemiological studies (e.g., lower 24-h heart rate, blunted circadian rhythm of heart rate), there were no major effects on a large number of cardiovascular parameters in laboratory studies of volunteers during exposure to cell-phone RFE. In population-based studies of a wide range of RFE frequencies, findings were equivocal for effects on birth defects, fertility, neuroblastoma in offspring, and reproductive hormones. Some changes in immunoglobulin levels and in peripheral blood lymphocytes were reported in different studies of radar and radio/television-transmission workers. Due to variations in results and difficulties in comparing presumably exposed subjects with controls, however, it is difficult to propose a unifying hypothesis of immune-system effects. Although subjective symptoms may be produced in some sensitive individuals exposed to RFE, there were no straightforward differences in such symptoms between exposed and control subjects in most epidemiological and laboratory studies. Consistent, strong associations were not found for RFE exposure and adverse health effects. The majority of changes relating to each of the diseases or conditions were small and not significant. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of previous reviews of older literature and the current review of recent literature, there is only weak evidence for a relationship between RFE and any endpoint studied (related to the topics above), thus providing at present no sufficient foundation for establishing RFE as a health hazard.
Bioelectromagnetic Societies Journal
Closing the book – Are power-line fields a dead issue?, by Gary Stix
Edison Electric Institute and Organizations of MISO States
Electromagnetic Fields: Policy, Science and Litigation – by William J. Walsh, Richard Wilson, and Martin S. Kaufman. [Note: The link to this publication no longer exists. If you wish to obtain a copy, contact the AEI Legal Center for the Public Interest.]
EMF Link — A Biomedical Science and Engineering Clearinghouse on Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF)
Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Fields — A service by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA).
IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.)
- Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR): COMAR is a group of experts on health and safety issues related to electromagnetic fields, from powerline through microwave frequency ranges. They are technical committee of the Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBS) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). The Committee reports to the EMBS President and Administrative Committee. COMAR’s primary area of interest is biological effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. Click here for a Sept. 2002 article on the subject of hypersensitivity.
- International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety
The Institution of Engineering and Technology
- The Possible Harmful Biological Effects of Low-level Electromagnetic Fields of Frequencies up to 300 GHz
- EMF Health Fact File
International EMF Project – UN World Health Organization. This site has a worldwide standard base on exposure limits to EMF of all types from many different countries in addition to various review documents or policy recommendations.
Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power — Understanding EMF
- The International Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Dosimetry Project
US Food and Drug Administration
Medical College of Wisconsin
Medline Plus Health Information: EMF
Microwave News — Note: Privately published newsletter that focuses on various EMF topics including transmission lines. This journal is not peer reviewed or backed by any established authority.
Mobile Phone Usage and EMF
- Dial-a-scare: The mobile phone panic is fuelled by politics, not science. This split between a scientific and more personal face is at the heart of the mobile phones saga. The original Stewart Report back in 2000 was essentially two reports in one. The first was an exemplary scientific review of knowledge in this particular field, which concluded that there was no significant evidence of harm. But the other aspect of the report was about self-consciously acknowledging public anxieties. The world’s leading experts in the field have themselves warned against the application of non-science- based precaution, making clear that some proof is required of a hazard. Even the consumer safety-obsessed European Commission, for its own reasons, has felt obliged to explain in an important communiqué that one cannot simply invoke precaution without some kind of identifiable hazard, as opposed to mere uncertainty. There will be no scientific ‘magic bullet’ that can resolve this controversy- the saga will continue for as long as those involved want it to. The call for ‘more research’ may be understandable on the part of some scientists who want to pursue any uncertainty for reasons of intellectual curiosity and/or further research funds. Were this saga just about mass anxiety or even media alarmism, it is likely that it would have ended long ago. What is fuelling the issue is the race to prove precautionary credentials on the part of particular science-related institutions. Having previously been a voice of reason on the matter, the International EMF Project of the World Health Organization (WHO) has been busily pushing for a more precautionary line on mobiles in the past couple of years – to the dismay of some scientists who see no reason to change advice without compelling new evidence. For the complete article, see: http://www.spikedonline.com/Articles/0000000CA887.htm
- The four-year REFLEX project funded by the European Union involved 12 groups from seven European countries, which all carried out supposedly identical experiments. Results were then compared to see if any consistent findings emerged. The conclusion? “Electromagnetic radiation of low and high frequencies is able to generate a genotoxic effect on certain but not all types of cells and is also able to change the function of certain genes, activating them and deactivating them,” says project leader Franz Adlkofer of the Verum Foundation in Munich, Germany. Michael Repacholi of the World Health Organization in Geneva questions how standardised the experiments were and says the results are far from conclusive. For the complete article, see: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6819
- The scientists behind the European Union-funded Reflex study said more research was needed to determine the actual effect of the phones on health. But the UK National Radiological Protection Board said people should not be worried by the study’s findings. A spokesman said the study had not shown that biological changes led to disease. He added that even research looking at the effects of radiowaves on cells and DNA did not consistently find evidence of damage.
For the complete article, see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/health/4113989.stm
- Environmental Impacts of Transmission Lines – Note: The second part of the overview is an A to Z directory of specific environmental issues and techniques to minimize or mitigate the impacts.
US National Research Council – Commission on Life Sciences
- Monitoring of Ongoing Research on the Health Effects of High Voltage Transmission Lines (Twelfth Annual Report)
Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, Consumer Protection (DATCP)
- In 1996, DATCP prepared a catalogue of publications on the subject of stray voltage and other electrical phenomena. The index and citations are available on separate files. [Note: The MREC seeks to update this catalogue as part of its future project activities.]
World Health Organization, International EMF Project
MREC Conference Presentations on EMF Issues
- EPRI Contact Current Research, (2003)