CURRENT MESSAGE!
Trosko's EPRI-funded EMF Study

Back



Posted:
26 March 2002
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Trosko's EPRI-funded EMF Study (Mueller).
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 05:32:03 -0600
From: Roy Beavers <guru@emfguru.org>
Reply-To: roy@emfguru.org
Organization: EMF-L List
To: guru <guru@emfguru.org>
 

Joanne:

Yes, we have talked about the Trosko study in the past on EMF-L.  And Louis Slesin has had a lot to say about it in his publication -- MICROWAVE NEWS -- which too few people read.....  See:  http://www.microwavenews.com

The problem with Trosko's work is not his results -- but his write-up......!!!

You noticed that he was sponsored (funded totally) by EPRI.......  I believe that as a consequence of that funding ... he makes those totally gratuitous (and unscientific) remarks in his text that say -- in effect -- "biological effects prove nothing."

Which is true, but it begs the question.  "Proof" is not the issue.  The real question is:  what is the totality of EMF science pointing us toward???

Thus we end up again -- with Trosko (and so many others who find "effects") -- at the very same point we always do in this EMF saga......

Few scientists seem to have the guts to buck EPRI, etc., and say:  "my laboratory results -- my evidence of biological effects ... alone, may not prove it -- but the fact that 'I' and others have detected these 'bioeffects' is incriminating evidence ... sufficient enough (when all is viewed together) for society to consider that the net result is a higher risk to public health.  One that needs to be publicized and regulated."

Just like lead or any one of another dozen toxins one might mention -- which we DO regulate and take precautions against.

In fact, the epidemiology alone proves that.!!!  The biological effects merely support the epidemiological evidence......  As I have repeatedly noted on these pages -- the epidemiological evidence that EMF constitutes a health hazard is stronger and more consistent than the epi evidence of a second hand tobacco smoke health hazard......!!!!!!   (Risk factors of 1.4 characterize the second hand smoke evidence.  As compared to risk factors of 1.5 to 2.5 or 3.0 in the case of EMF.)

The EMF case is clearly the more compelling.....!!!!

Yet, as we know, the government has found that it is eager to attack the second hand tobacco smoke.....  Why not the EMF?  You know why......  Our government is not serving the people......  Our government is the lackey of industry (profit$$$$$).

Rather than reach a conclusion based on the total science picture available -- which would provide the impetus for a public health policy that would begin to protect the public -- the government's policy is being aided and abetted by gutless scientists who retreat to an obvious, easy, and "safe" judgment ... like Trosko does in his write-up....... (Reported below.)

WHY?  SO THAT THEY CAN GO BACK TO THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR MORE MONEY$$$$$$$  They know that once they come down on the obvious "higher risk" judgment -- they get cut off.......   THERE IS NO INDEPENDENT SCIENCE  -- funding source -- IN AMERICA......

Even those so-called "third party sources" (like the National Cancer Institute) all seem to be wedded to a "let's not offend the electrical industry" stance......   There again -- you will find that "the industry" is a big source of their funding.......

THERE IS NO INDEPENDENT SCIENCE IN AMERICA......   American science has been corrupted by the same "profit" compulsion that drives the rest of our society......

Cheerio........  (Thanks, Joanne -- yes, Trosko's results incriminate EMF, but he is
likely to be among the last to admit it........)

Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.org

It is better to light a single candle.......

PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFIT$$$$$$


 
JCMPelican@aol.com wrote:

(10/16/2000) Electromagnetic Fields Found to be Potential Tumor Promoters.

Roy   -    I do not recall seeing this study before and was surprised to note that the work was funded by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

The last sentence of the abstract reads as follows:

"The bottom line is we showed there is a biological effect of EMF as measured by altering the expression of the hemoglobin-producing gene."

The article appears in the 10-16-2000 Science Daily:  Electromagnetic Fields Affect Human Cells.

Website access info:   http://eces.org/articles/static/97167240067259.shtml
 

Take care  -    Joanne Mueller

--

Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.org

It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men
to do  nothing.....     .......Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFIT$$$



Back to Top

Back