Skip to first unread message


Oct 15, 2007, 3:13:21 AM10/15/07
to mobilfunk_...@googlegroups.com
Informant: Martin Weatherall

----- Original Message -----
*From:* Robert Riedlinger
*To:* Minister...@hc-sc.gc.ca <mailto:Minister...@hc-sc.gc.ca>
*Sent:* Sunday, October 14, 2007 1:38 PM
*Subject:* Fw: Emailing: efs205

*This is an open letter to Health Canada.*
* I am a Canadian citizen born in Canada and I would like to trust the
people that are in charge of our health services,But,judging by the out
dated information that is being distributed to Canadians by Health
Canada,I find it very difficult to hold trust or faith in HC.There are
many studies,surveys etc.that have been done since 1998,that show
clearly that electromagnetic fields ,well below Safety Code Six
Guidelines,can cause ill health,both temporary and permanent,yet Health
Canada seems to base their conclusions on 1998 and previous scientific
*One needs not be super intelligent to note what has taken place since
our atmosphere has been charged with electro-smog.*
* I for one am very much affected by EMF when I just pass by some
cellphone base stations and I find I am not alone.People half my age
complain of the same effects as I feel ,such as hearing obstruction,head
noise,headaches and joint and muscle pain.Has Health Canada ever given
thought to the fact that there could be many people that are feeling ill
from EMF that could be using drugs,both legal and illegal,to reduce the
pain they suffer from EMF??*
* I know from personal experience since my family doctor prescribed at
least 3 different drugs to thy to reduce the pain I suffered while
living in a home I purchased in Harrison Hot Springs BC,which was
situated within 400 feet of a CBC tower that also house cellphone antennas.*
* The only solution I found was to move away from the tower.That move
cost me many thousands of $ but I had no choice other than dope my self
in order to lessen the pain.*
* I am very concerned,as feel Health Canada should be,of the many young
children that are spending long hours on cellphones,I Pods and video
games which all emit EMF into their growing brain and nerves.*
* I see Germany and The European Union are now telling their people to
use precaution with cellphones ,Wi Fi,etc yet I do not see Health Canada
doing like-wise.Our children are made of flesh and blood like children
in Europe,are they not??*
*I hope Health Canada will take a close look at the BioInititive Report
which I am attaching to this letter,take steps to correct the problem by
lowering the EMF densities allowed by Safety Code 6 guidelines to *
*those suggested by the good scientists that did the very
in-depth,thorough evaluation of harmful health effects from EMF below C
S Code 6 out dated Guidelines.In my opinion,not to reduce the densities
will result in many thousands of Canadians being injured over a period
of time.Those same Canadians will,are,seeking medical care and we all
know what that means!! Yours Truly Robert Riedlinger 30199 Silverhill
Ave Mission BC V4S 1H9 Ph 604 826 6791*
* A total of 29 studies with populations from 12 countries were included
in this*

*meta-analysis. *

*Summary for the Public Ms. Sage*

*A significant excess risk for adult brain tumors in electrical workers
and those adults with*

*occupational EMF exposure was reported in a meta-analysis (review of
many individual studies)*

*by Kheifets et al., (1995). This is about the same size risk for lung
cancer and secondhand smoke*

*(US DHHS, 2006). A total of 29 studies with populations from 12
countries were included in this*

*meta-analysis. The relative risk was reported as 1.16 (CI = 1.08 ?
1.24) or a 16% increased risk*

*for all brain tumors. For gliomas, the risk estimate was reported to be
1.39 (1.07 ? 1.82) or a 39%*

*increased risk for those in electrical occupations. A second
meta-analysis published by Kheifets*

*et al., ((2001) added results of 9 new studies published after 1995. It
reported a new pooled*

*estimate (OR = 1.16, 1.08 ? 1.01) that showed little change in the risk
estimate overall from 1995.*

*The evidence for a relationship between exposure and breast cancer is
relatively strong in men*

*(Erren, 2001), and some (by no means all) studies show female breast
cancer also to be elevated*

*with increased exposure (see Chapter 12). Brain tumors and acoustic
neuromas are more*

*common in exposed persons (see Chapter 10). There is less published
evidence on other cancers,*

*but Charles et al. (2003) report that workers in the highest 10%
category for EMF exposure were*

*twice as likely to die of prostate cancer as those exposed at lower
levels (OR 2.02, 95% CI =*

*1.34-3.04). Villeneuve et al. (2000) report statistically significant
elevations of non-Hodgkin?s*

*lymphoma in electric utility workers in relation to EMF exposure, while
Tynes et al. (2003)*

*report elevated rates of malignant melanoma in persons living near to
high voltage power lines.*

*While these observations need replication, they suggest a relationship
between exposure and*

*cancer in adults beyond leukemia.*

*In total the scientific evidence for adult disease associated with EMF
exposure is sufficiently*

*strong for adult cancers that preventive steps are appropriate, even if
not all reports have shown*

*exactly the same positive relationship. This is especially true since
many factors reduce our*

*ability to see disease patterns that might be related to EMF exposure:
there is no unexposed*

*population for comparison, for example, and other difficulties in
exposure assessment, The*

*evidence for a relationship between EMF exposure and adult cancers and

*diseases is sufficiently strong at present to merit preventive actions
to reduce EMF exposure.*


*5. Breast Cancer*


*There is rather strong evidence from multiple areas of scientific
investigation that ELF is related*

*to breast cancer. Over the last two decades there have been numerous
epidemiological studies*

*(studies of human illness) on breast cancer in both men and women,
although this relationship*

*remains controversial among scientists. Many of these studies report
that ELF exposures are*

*related to increased risk of breast cancer (not all studies report such
effects, but then, we do not*

*expect 100% or even 50% consistency in results in science, and do not
require it to take*

*reasonable preventative action).*

*The evidence from studies on women in the workplace rather strongly
suggests that ELF is*

*a risk factor for breast cancer for women with long-term exposures of
10 mG and higher.*

*Breast cancer studies of people who work in relatively high ELF
exposures (10 mG and above)*

*show higher rates of this disease. Most studies of workers who are
exposed to ELF have defined*

*high exposure levels to be somewhere between 2 mG and 10 mG; however
this kind of mixing of*



Click here...


* from The Independent & The Independent on Sunday

13 October 2007 12:37

* Home <http://www.independent.co.uk/>
o > News <http://news.independent.co.uk/>
+ > *Health* <http://news.independent.co.uk/health/>

Two in three believe radiation from phones damaged their health

By Geoffrey Lean

Published: 08 July 2007

Two-thirds of Britons believe radiation from mobile phones and their
masts has affected their health, a startling official survey shows. And
huge majorities are dissatisfied with government assurances about the
potential threat.

The survey is the result of a giant European Union exercise that polled
more than 27,000 people across the continent, 1,375 of them in Britain.
It shows that concern about the radiation is far greater than even the
most ardent campaigners had dared to believe, and that official attempts
to downplay the issue have backfired.

It also goes some way to explain the overwhelming public response
received by The Independent on Sunday since we started raising questions
about the effect of the radiation on people and wildlife in April.

This month, two councils - Haringey in London and Carmarthenshire in
Wales - will be considering whether to allow Wi-Fi in their schools,
after concern expressed by Sir William Stewart, the chairman of the
Health Protection Agency. Sir William told the BBC's Panorama, "I
believe that there is a need for a review of the Wi-Fi and other areas
... I think it's timely for it to be done now."

The survey, by the EU's Eurobarometer programme, which samples opinion
across the continent, found 65 per cent of Britons believed mobile
phones affected their health, and 71 per cent thought the masts did.

Across Europe, the figures were 73 and 76 per cent respectively, sharply
up from 55 and 58 per cent five years ago.

Recent years have seen increasing evidence of risks from the phones.
Scandinavian studies have suggested that people who have used them for
more than 10 years are much more likely to get brain tumours, and
thatthe radiation kills brain cells, which could lead to today's young
people being senile from their forties.

There is much less evidence on effects from the masts, but studies have
revealed a worrying incidence of symptoms such as headaches, fatigue,
nausea and memory problems. Campaigners also claim they may cause cancers.

The survey shows that more than half of Britons are "very" or "fairly"
concerned about such potential health effects, despite efforts at
reassurance by ministers, officials and some scientists. Moreover, it
reveals great dissatisfaction with the information they are given.

Nearly three-quarters of Britons say they are "not very well" or "not at
all" informed about the official "protection framework" against the
"potential health risks" from the radiation.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:
Shortcut to: http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article2745131.ece

Magnetic Field Studies: There is little confirmed experimental evidence
that ELF magnetic fields can affect human physiology and behaviour at
field strengths found in the home or environment. Exposure of volunteers
for several hours to ELF fields up to 5 mT had little effect on a number
of clinical and physiological tests, including blood changes, ECG, heart
rate, blood pressure, and body temperature.

Dutch Fact Sheets

*Fact Sheet N205*

*November 1998*


*Extremely Low Frequency (ELF)*

* *

* *

Everyone is exposed to a complex mix of electromagnetic fields
(EMF) of different frequencies that permeate our environment.
Exposures to many EMF frequencies are increasing significantly as
technology advances unabated and new applications are found.

While the enormous benefits of using electricity in everyday life
and health care are unquestioned, during the past 20 years the
general public has become increasingly concerned about potential
adverse health effects of exposure to electric and magnetic fields
at extremely low frequencies (ELF). Such exposures arise mainly
from the transmission and use of electrical energy at the power
frequencies of 50/60 Hz.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is addressing the associated
health issues through the International Electromagnetic Fields
Project. Any health consequence needs to be clearly identified and
appropriate mitigation steps taken if deemed necessary. Present
research results are often contradictory. This adds to public
concern, confusion and lack of confidence that supportable
conclusions about safety can be reached.

The purpose of this Fact Sheet is to provide information about ELF
field exposure and its possible impacts on health within the
community and the workplace. Information comes from a WHO review
of this subject and other recent reviews by eminent authorities.

*ELF Electric and Magnetic Fields *

Electromagnetic fields consist of electric (E) and magnetic (H)
waves travelling together, as shown in the diagram below. They
travel at the speed of light and are characterised by a frequency
and a wavelength. The frequency is simply the number of
oscillations in the wave per unit time, measured in units of hertz
(1 Hz = 1 cycle per second), and the wavelength is the distance
travelled by the wave in one oscillation (or cycle).

* *

*Sinusoidal electromagnetic wave*

Sinusoidal electromagnetic wave

ELF fields are defined as those having frequencies up to 300 Hz.
At frequencies this low, the wavelengths in air are very long
(6000 km at 50 Hz and 5000 km at 60 Hz), and, in practical
situations, the electric and magnetic fields act independently of
one another and are measured separately.

* *

*Electric fields* arise from electric charges. They govern the
motion of other charges situated in them. Their strength is
measured in units of volt per metre, (V/m), or kilovolt per metre
(kV/m). When charges accumulate on an object they create a
tendency for like or opposite charges to be repelled or attracted,
respectively. The strength of that tendency is characterised by
the *voltage *and is measured in units of volt, (V). Any device
connected to an electrical outlet, even if the device is not
switched on, will have an associated electric field that is
proportional to the voltage of the source to which it is
connected. Electric fields are strongest close to the device and
diminish with distance. Common materials, such as wood and metal,
shield against them.

* *

*Magnetic fields* arise from the motion of electric charges, i.e.
a *current*. They govern the motion of moving charges. Their
strength is measured in units of ampere per metre, (A/m) but is
usually expressed in terms of the corresponding magnetic induction
measured in units of tesla, (T), millitesla (mT) or microtesla
(mT). In some countries another unit called the gauss, (G), is
commonly used for measuring magnetic induction (10,000 G = 1 T, 1
G = 100 mT, 1 mT = 10 G, 1 mT = 10 mG). Any device connected to an
electrical outlet, when the device is switched on and a current is
flowing, will have an associated magnetic field that is
proportional to the current drawn from the source to which it is
connected. Magnetic fields are strongest close to the device and
diminish with distance. They are not shielded by most common
materials, and pass easily through them.

* *


Naturally occurring 50/60 Hz electric and magnetic field levels
are extremely low; of the order of 0.0001 V/m, and 0.00001 mT
respectively. Human exposure to ELF fields is primarily associated
with the generation, transmission and use of electrical energy.
Sources and typical upper limits of ELF fields found in the
community, home and workplace are given below.

/* */

/*Community: */Electrical energy from generating stations is
distributed to communities via high voltage transmission lines.
Transformers are used to lower the voltage for connections to
residential distribution lines that deliver the energy to homes.
Electric and magnetic fields underneath overhead transmission
lines may be as high as 12 kV/m and 30 µT respectively. Around
generating stations and substations, electric fields up to 16 kV/m
and magnetic fields up to 270 µT may be found.

/* */

/*Home: */Electric and magnetic fields in homes depend on many
factors, including the distance from local power lines, the number
and type of electrical appliances in use in the home, and the
configuration and position of household electrical wiring.
Electric fields around most household appliances and equipment
typically do not exceed 500 V/m and magnetic fields typically do
not exceed 150 mT. In both cases, field levels may be
substantially greater at small distances but they do decrease
rapidly with distance.

/* */

/*Workplace: */Electric and magnetic fields exist around
electrical equipment and wiring throughout industry. Workers who
maintain transmission and distribution lines may be exposed to
very large electric and magnetic fields. Within generating
stations and substations electric fields in excess of 25 kV/m and
magnetic fields in excess of 2 mT may be found. Welders can be
subjected to magnetic field exposures as high as 130 mT. Near
induction furnaces and industrial electrolytic cells magnetic
fields can be as high as 50 mT. Office workers are exposed to very
much smaller fields when using equipment such as photocopying
machines and video display terminals.

* *

*Health Effects*

The only practical way that ELF fields interact with living
tissues is by inducing electric fields and currents in them.
However, the magnitude of these induced currents from exposure to
ELF fields at levels normally found in our environment, is less
than the currents occurring naturally in the body.

*/ /*

*/Electric Field Studies:/ *Available evidence suggests that,
apart from stimulation arising from electric charge induced on the
surface of the body, the effects of exposures of up to 20 kV/m are
few and innocuous. Electric fields have not been shown to have any
effect on reproduction or development in animals at strengths over
100 kV/m.

/* */

/*Magnetic Field Studies: */There is little confirmed experimental
evidence that ELF magnetic fields can affect human physiology and
behaviour at field strengths found in the home or environment.
Exposure of volunteers for several hours to ELF fields up to 5 mT
had little effect on a number of clinical and physiological tests,
including blood changes, ECG, heart rate, blood pressure, and body

/* */

/*Melatonin: */Some investigators have reported that ELF field
exposure may suppress secretion of melatonin, a hormone connected
with our day-night rhythms. It has been suggested that melatonin
might be protective against breast cancer so that such suppression
might contribute to an increased incidence of breast cancer
already initiated by other agents. While there is some evidence
for melatonin effects in laboratory animals, volunteer studies
have not confirmed such changes in humans.

*/ /*

*/Cancer:/ *There is no convincing evidence that exposure to ELF
fields causes direct damage to biological molecules, including
DNA. It is thus unlikely that they could initiate the process of
carcinogenesis. However, studies are still underway to determine
if ELF exposure can influence cancer promotion or co-promotion.
Recent animal studies have not found evidence that ELF field
exposure affects cancer incidence.

* *

*Epidemiological Studies:* In 1979 Wertheimer and Leeper reported
an association between childhood leukaemia and certain features of
the wiring connecting their homes to the electrical distribution
lines. Since then, a large number of studies have been conducted
to follow up this important result. Analysis of these papers by
the US National Academy of Sciences in 1996 suggested that
residence near power lines was associated with an elevated risk of
childhood leukaemia (relative risk RR=1.5), but not with other
cancers. A similar association between cancer and residential
exposure of adults was not seen from these studies.

Many studies published during the last decade on occupational
exposure to ELF fields have exhibited a number of inconsistencies.
They suggest there may be a small elevation in the risk of
leukaemia among electrical workers. However, confounding factors,
such as possible exposures to chemicals in the work environment,
have not been adequately taken into account in many of them.
Assessment of ELF field exposure has not correlated well with the
cancer risk among exposed subjects. Therefore, a cause-and-effect
link between ELF field exposure and cancer has not been confirmed.

* *

*NIEHS Panel: *The US National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (NIEHS) has completed its 5-year RAPID Program.The RAPID
Program replicated and extended studies reporting effects with
possible health implications, and conducted further studies to
determine if indeed there was any health consequence from ELF
field exposure. In June 1998, NIEHS convened an international
Working Group to review the research results. NIEHS's
international panel concluded, using criteria established by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), that ELF
fields should be considered as a "possible human carcinogen".

"Possible human carcinogen" is the weakest of three categories
("possibly carcinogenic to humans", "probably carcinogenic to
humans" and "is carcinogenic to humans") used by IARC to classify
scientific evidence on potential carcinogens. IARC has two further
classifications of scientific evidence: "is not classifiable" and
"is probably not carcinogenic to humans", but the NIEHS Working
Group considered there was enough evidence to eliminate these

"Possible human carcinogen" is a classification used to denote an
agent for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in
humans and less than sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity in
experimental animals. Thus *the classification is based on the
strength of scientific evidence, not on the strength of
carcinogenicity or risk of cancer from the agent. *Thus, "possible
human carcinogen" means limited credible evidence exists
suggesting that exposure to ELF fields may cause cancer. While it
cannot be excluded that ELF field exposure causes cancer from
available evidence, further focused, high quality research is now
needed to resolve this issue.

The decision of the NIEHS Working Group was based mainly on the
appearance of consistency in epidemiological studies suggesting
residence near power lines resulted in an apparently higher risk
of leukaemia in children. Support for this association was found
in studies relating childhood leukaemia incidence to proximity to
power lines and to magnetic fields measured for 24 hours in homes.
Furthermore, the Working Group also found limited evidence for an
increased occurrence of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in the
occupational setting.

* *

*International EMF Project*

WHO's International EMF Project has been established to work
towards resolving the health issues raised by EMF exposure.
Scientific reviews have been conducted and gaps in knowledge
identified. This has resulted in a research agenda for the next
few years that will ensure better health risk assessments can be
made. A formal task group meeting to assess the results is
scheduled by IARC in 2001. WHO will then adopt IARC's conclusions
and complete an assessment of non-cancer health risks in 2002.
Further information can be obtained from the WHO EMF Project home
page at _http://www.who.ch/emf_ <http://www.who.int/emf>.

* *

*International Standards*

The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection
(ICNIRP) has published guidelines on exposure limits for all EMF.
The guidelines provide adequate protection against known health
effects and those that can occur when touching charged objects in
an external electric field. Limits of EMF exposure recommended in
many countries are broadly similar to those of ICNIRP, which is a
non-governmental organization (NGO) formally recognised by WHO and
a full partner in the International EMF Project. It will reassess
its guidelines once the EMF Project has completed new health risk

* *

*Protective Measures*

Large conducting objects such as metal fences, barriers or similar
metallic structures permanently installed near high voltage
electrical transmission lines should be grounded. If such objects
are not grounded, the power line can charge them to a sufficiently
high voltage that a person who comes into close proximity or
contact with the object can receive a startling and uncomfortable
shock. A person may also receive such a shock when touching a car
or bus parked under or very near high voltage power lines.

* *

*General public: *Since current scientific information is only
weakly suggestive and does not establish that exposure to ELF
fields at levels normally encountered in our living environment
might cause adverse health effects, there is no need for any
specific protective measures for members of the general public./
/Where there are sources of high ELF field exposure, access by the
public will generally be restricted by fences or barriers, so that
no additional protective measures will be needed.

* *

*Workers: *Protection from 50/60 Hz electric field exposure can be
relatively easily achieved using shielding materials. This is only
necessary for workers in very high field areas. More commonly,
where electric fields are very large, access of personnel is
restricted. There is no practical, economical way to shield
against ELF magnetic fields. Where magnetic fields are very strong
the only practical protective method available is to limit of

* *

*EMF Interference*

Strong ELF fields cause electromagnetic interference (EMI) in
cardiac pacemakers or other implanted electromedical devices.
Individuals using these devices should contact their doctor to
determine their susceptibility to these effects. WHO urges
manufacturers of these devices to make them much less susceptible
to EMI.

Office workers may see image movement on the screen of their
computer terminal. If ELF magnetic fields around the terminal are
greater than about 1 mT (10 mG) this can cause interference with
the electrons producing the image on the screen. A simple solution
to this problem is to relocate the computer to another part of the
room where the magnetic fields are below 1 mT. These magnetic
fields are found near cables that provide electric power to office
or apartment buildings, or around transformers associated with
power supplies to buildings. The fields from these sources are
generally well below the levels that cause any health concern.

* *

*Noise, Ozone and Corona*

Noise in the form of a buzzing or humming sound may be heard
around electrical transformers or high voltage power lines
producing corona (see below). While the noise may be annoying,
there are no EMF health consequences associated with these sounds.

Electrical devices such as photocopiers or any device using a high
voltage to function may produce ozone, a colourless gas having a
pungent smell. Electrical discharges in the air convert oxygen
molecules into ozone. While people may easily smell the ozone, the
concentrations produced around photocopiers and similar devices
are well below health standards.

Corona or electrical discharges into the air are produced around
high voltage power lines. It is sometimes visible on a humid night
or during rainfall and can produce noise and ozone. Both the noise
levels and ozone concentrations around power lines have no health

* *

*What should be done while research continues?*

One of the objectives of the International EMF Project is to help
national authorities weigh the benefits of using EMF technology
against the detriment should any adverse health effects be
demonstrated, and decide what protective measures, if any, may be
needed. It will take some years for the required research to be
completed, evaluated and published by WHO. In the meantime, WHO

_ _

_Strict adherence to existing national or international safety
standards_: Such standards, based on current knowledge, are
developed to protect everyone in the population.

_ _

_Simple protective measures_: Fences or barriers around strong ELF
sources help preclude unauthorised access to areas where national
or international exposure limits may be exceeded.

_ _

_Consultation with local authorities and the public in siting new
power lines_: Obviously power lines must be sited to provide power
to consumers. Despite the fact that ELF field levels around
transmission and distribution lines are not considered a health
risk, siting decisions are often required to take into account
aesthetics and public sensibilities. Open communication and
discussion between the electric power utility and the public
during the planning stages can help create public understanding
and greater acceptance of a new facility.

_ _

_An effective system of health information and communication_
among scientists, governments, industry and the public can help
raise general awareness of programmes to deal with exposure to ELF
fields and reduce any mistrust and fears.

* *

*Where Can I Find More Information?*

The International EMF Project assesses health and environmental
risks to EMF in the frequency range from 0 - 300 GHz. It is
located at WHO Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. For more
information please consult the Project home page

* *
* *

*References for further reading*

ICNIRP (1998) International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection Guidelines for limiting exposure to time varying
electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz).
Health Physics 74(4), 494-522.

NIEHS (1998) Assessment of health effects from exposure to
power-line frequency electric and magnetic fields. Portier CJ and
Wolfe MS (eds) NIEHS Working Group Report, National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institute of Health,
Research Triangle Park, NC, USA, pp 523. Available from NIEHS or
from home page at: _http://www.niehs.nih.gov/emfrapid/home.htm_

Repacholi M and Greenebaum B (1998) Interaction of static and
extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fields with living
systems: health effects and research needs. Bioelectromagnetics
(In press). (Summary report of WHO scientific review meeting on
static and ELF held in Bologna, 1997).

WHO (1997) WHO's Agenda for EMF Research. World Health
Organization publication WHO/EHG/98.13, WHO Geneva. Also available
on International EMF Project home page at:


For further information, please contact the Office of the
Spokesperson, WHO, Geneva. Tel (+41 22) 791 2599, Fax (+41 22) 791
4858. Email: i...@who.int <mailto:i...@who.int>. All WHO Press
Releases, Fact Sheets and Features as well as other information on
this subject can be obtained on Internet on the WHO home page

© WHO/OMS, 1998 | Concept <http://www.who.int/home/credits>

The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:
Shortcut to:

BioInitiative Report Summary for Public.pdf
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages