Post by Dr. Hildegarde Staninger on Nov 16, 2006 1:56:01 GMT -5
Part I:
PROTECTING YOURSELF FROM ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS IN THE HOME, WORKPLACE and ENVIRONMENT
Copyright © 2009 Dr. Hildegarde Staninger, RIET-1
Industrial Toxicologist/IH,
Doctor of Integrative Medicine
Integrative Health Systems, LLC
415 3/4th N. Larchmont Blvd.,
Los Angeles, CA 90004
Tel: 323-466-2599 Fax: 323-466-2774
www.staningerreport.com
www.1cellonelight.com/store
October 16-18, 2006
ABSTRACT
Everyone in our modern society is exposed to the electric and magnetic fields (EMF’s) that surround all electric devices (power lines, electric wiring, appliances, cell phones, cell phone towers and other similar items). Recently, scientific studies have raised questions about the possibility of adverse health effects from exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF) as it has generated a heated controversy in recent years, “debated” before the public through the national broadcast and print media. The American worker would justifiably be concerned and deserves a clear message on this issue. It is usually the case with environmental exposures that workers are exposed “first and worst,” as potentially hazardous chemicals, materials and agents are introduced first for industrial purposes and used in ways that expose workers to much higher concentrations than would generally occur in the community, except in the debatable case of cell phone usage. Current research in the area of terahertz/far-infrared technology is the illustrator, when the primary mechanism of dysfunction is water tension and implodment within the cell and its matrix lattice. This is true of EMF’s among certain occupations in utilities and other industries where frequent, persistent, or high exposures may occur. We need to focus our efforts in evaluating the potential hazards of EMF’s and the future problems of extremely low frequency (ELF’s) until we understand the nature and extent of any effects and how to prevent them in the home and in the work- place.
What are EMFs and How are Workers Exposed?
EMF’s are invisible lines of force created whenever electricity is generated or used. EMF’s are produced by power lines, electric wiring, and electric equipment and appliances. The frequency of EMFs is measured in hertz (Hz, or cycles per second). People are exposed to both electric and magnetic fields, but scientists are most concerned about magnetic fields in the range near 60 Hz – the frequency of electric power in North America.1
Workers may be exposed to high magnetic fields if they work near electrical systems that use large amounts of electric power (for example, large electric motors, generators, or the power supply or electric cables of a building). High magnetic fields are also found near power saws, drills, copy machines, electric pencil sharpeners, televisions, computer monitors and other small electric appliances. The strength of the magnetic field depends on equipment design and current flow – not on equipment size, complexity, or voltage. Though some electric equipment produces EMFs of other frequencies, most health research has concentrated only on frequencies near 60 Hz.
The EMF exposures for many jobs have not been measured, but Table 1-1 shows average exposures to magnetic fields for typical workers who use electric equipment. Exposures during a work shift vary with the strength of the magnetic field, the worker’s distance from the EMF source and the time the worker spends in the field. For comparison, the table also lists worker exposures off the job.
Studies have shown that some workers exposed to high magnetic fields have increased cancer rates, which may be due to the vibration of the cell membranes causing toxic substances to penetrate into the cell and generate various mechanisms to initiate cancer.2 The most important data comes from six recent studies of workers wearing EMF monitors to measure magnetic fields.
All but one study found significantly higher cancer rates for men with average workday exposures above 4 milligauss. However, the results of these studies disagree in important ways – such as the type of cancer associated with EMF exposures. So scientists cannot be sure whether the increased risks are caused by EMF’s or by other factors such as the synergistic effects of EMF and pollution. A few preliminary studies have also associated workplace EMF’s with breast cancer, and one study has reported a possible link between occupational EMF exposure and Alzheimer’s disease.3
The data from all of these studies are too limited for scientists to draw conclusions. However, a national research effort is under way, and more study results are expected in a few years from the United States and World Health Organizations, especially in regarding the effects upon children with the increased use of cell phones.
Because of the scientific uncertainty, no federal limits for worker exposures to EMF’s have been recommended or established in the United States. Two private organizations have developed guidelines to protect workers from the known effects of extremely high exposures (that is, those more than 1,000 times the exposures typically found in occupational environments). However, these
guidelines do not address the possible health effects of the low EMF exposures usually found on the job.
The U.S. Department of Transportation has been evaluating the health effects from EMF and Radio-Frequency Radiation (RFR) as associated with transportation systems over an emerging cross-modal issue. An emerging cross-modal transportation safety, environmental and health issue of growing national interest is the existence and nature of potentially adverse health effects from exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF’s). Of special concern to the public and Congress are magnetic fields of Extremely Low Frequency (ELF’s, from 3 to 3000 Hz or 3 KHz), a spectral range including the power grid frequency of 60 Hz, and its harmonics.
Such ELF/EMF sources and emissions are pervasive in our technological society. Common sources of environmental EMF are the same as in the work- place: power generation; transmission and distribution lines; industrial equipment and office devices; home electrical appliances and electrical transportation systems.4
Recent Public Awareness
Numerous recent studies, press articles, TV programs and movies have publicized mounting evidence for possible links between exposure to EMF’s at or near power-ine frequencies and various adverse health impacts, including cancers and reproductive effects5, 6
Research findings on bio-effects of EMF’so date, albeit controversial, have focused considerable public and governmental attention on the need for more research to resolve uncertainties and for coordinated polices, pre-regulatory actions and communications on this issue.
As a result of public pressure from consumers, some companies are adopting prudent practices, such as redesign of products (electric blankets and computer equipment), work environments and operations to minimize occupational and home exposures to electric and/or magnetic fields. Utilities have put a hold on new power liens and many are involved in litigation.
Current Epidemiological Studies
Epidemiological studies of residential and occupational exposures to EMF’s, and laboratory studies on humans, animals and cells for a wide range of EMF exposure conditions have yet to agree on a reproducible and validated causal mechanism for adverse bio-effect from chronic exposure to weak environmental EMF’s or ELF’s. Technology in these fields has grown over the last decade to expand the environmental health effects of the world.
The present state of scientific knowledge is still too rudimentary to serve as a basis for regulations or guidelines limiting emission of public and work place exposures to EMF. There are several reasons for this situation.
The specific electric and/or magnetic field characteristics that could be hazardous to people (frequency ranges, field strength, and continuous or intermittent exposure duration) are presently unknown. Nor are the metrics for “dose” of exposure linked to specific “dose response,” and the biological coupling mechanisms agreed upon.
The EMF exposure history cannot be easily separated from other confounding health factors in epidemiological studies. Life evolved in earth’s magnetic field (of order 1 Gauss); this ambient field changes continuously, due to polar wander, solar activity (magnetic storms and sunspot cycle), and induced micropulsations. The human body generates EMF’s from bio-activities and induced fields and currents in response to external EMF.
It is difficult to define the nature, extent and severity of EMF health hazards, given the variety, complexity and lack of consistency for biological responses reported by researchers. However, among the clear adverse effects found are depressed melatonin and shifts in circadian rhythms. These could adversely affect fatigue, alertness, reaction time and other physiological and behavioral factors important to transportation workers and travelers.
The increased incidence of brain tumors from cell phone users has created great concern from the public and the World Health Organization especially with the continued use of cell phones by children. A direct relationship to the vibration of the water molecule and the formation of a tumor by pollution in the area has been attributed to the increased vibration rate of heat shock proteins in that area of the brain.7
Federal Government Response
A controversial EPA report labeled “EMF A Possible Cancer Promoter” was drafted in 1990. The report has been held up by OMB and the White House, and is still undergoing revision; EPA has defined its R & D priorities on EMF in 1992, and has supported FRA on EMF issues.
The Committee on Interagency Radiation Research and Policy Coordination (CIRRPC) convened by OSTP includes representatives from EPA, DOE, FDA, DOA, OSHA/DOL, DOD, as well as DOT/RSPA. Its Science sub-panel on health effects of EMF has reviewed the current state of knowledge, to determine if regulatory actions are warranted. CIRRPC sponsored a review of EMF- related health effects in 1992: While denying that definite linkage has been proven, its report (“Health Effects of Low Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields”) identified electrified railroads as a “worst case” for EMF exposures and called for more research on the issue, since the males exposed to EMF became developed testicular cancer.8
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a research arm of CDC within HHS and OSHA, convened a 1991 workshop and defined a National Research Agenda on EMF effects in the work place. Transportation workers exposed to EMF will have to be included in occupational epidemiology studies, and NIOSH has been asked by Congress to investigate excess cancer in electrical rail workers exposed to secondary EMF. When workplace surveys will be are completed and issues of dose metrics, and health effects based on dose- response are resolved, NIOSH will recommend occupational exposure standards for EMF to OSHA.
The DOE, as the lead agency of an Interagency EMF Working Group – on which DOT/FRA was represented – has prepared a “National Strategic EMF Research Plan”, and the NAS was also asked to initiate a study and report to Congress. The 1992 Energy Policy Act (EPACT) Section 2118 mandated that the DOE and HHS/NIEHS take the lead in coordinating a $65 million; five – year public private cost shared national EMF research and public information
dissemination (RAPID) program. An interagency committee (EMF-IAC) and an advisory committee (NEMFAC) were established to guide the program so as to resolve scientific uncertainties and report to Congress in 1997. The DOT, based on the FRA R & D program on EMF assessment and health effects, is a designated participating member of the EMF-IAC.
Regulatory Status
Because of gaps and uncertainties in current knowledge on the subject, neither the EPA nor OSHA is close to promulgating regulations limiting public or occupational EMF field exposure. DOT regulations would normally follow EPA and OSHA regulations as for noise or other environmental emissions. FRA, however, had to consider EMF as part of development safety regulations for maglev and high-speed rail proposed US applications.
Other countries have already adopted public and occupational exposure interim limits of 50/60 Hz EMF. The World Health Organization and the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) International Non-Ionizing Radiation Committee (INIRC) published interim ELF/EMF Exposure Guidelines in 1990. Japan, England, Denmark, Italy and Germany are adopting similar standards. Sweden, based on recent studies linked excess cancer to EMF from residential and work exposures, is taking more drastic EMF reduction measures.
In the absence of U.S. federal guidelines, seven states have issued their own regulations limiting electric and magnetic fields at the edge of the right of way for power lines. Other states are moving in this direction, as well, while adopting “prudent avoidance” policies.
( Continued in Part II - drhildy.proboards46.com/index.cgi?board=emf&action=display&thread=1163660278 )
PROTECTING YOURSELF FROM ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS IN THE HOME, WORKPLACE and ENVIRONMENT
Copyright © 2009 Dr. Hildegarde Staninger, RIET-1
Industrial Toxicologist/IH,
Doctor of Integrative Medicine
Integrative Health Systems, LLC
415 3/4th N. Larchmont Blvd.,
Los Angeles, CA 90004
Tel: 323-466-2599 Fax: 323-466-2774
www.staningerreport.com
www.1cellonelight.com/store
October 16-18, 2006
ABSTRACT
Everyone in our modern society is exposed to the electric and magnetic fields (EMF’s) that surround all electric devices (power lines, electric wiring, appliances, cell phones, cell phone towers and other similar items). Recently, scientific studies have raised questions about the possibility of adverse health effects from exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF) as it has generated a heated controversy in recent years, “debated” before the public through the national broadcast and print media. The American worker would justifiably be concerned and deserves a clear message on this issue. It is usually the case with environmental exposures that workers are exposed “first and worst,” as potentially hazardous chemicals, materials and agents are introduced first for industrial purposes and used in ways that expose workers to much higher concentrations than would generally occur in the community, except in the debatable case of cell phone usage. Current research in the area of terahertz/far-infrared technology is the illustrator, when the primary mechanism of dysfunction is water tension and implodment within the cell and its matrix lattice. This is true of EMF’s among certain occupations in utilities and other industries where frequent, persistent, or high exposures may occur. We need to focus our efforts in evaluating the potential hazards of EMF’s and the future problems of extremely low frequency (ELF’s) until we understand the nature and extent of any effects and how to prevent them in the home and in the work- place.
What are EMFs and How are Workers Exposed?
EMF’s are invisible lines of force created whenever electricity is generated or used. EMF’s are produced by power lines, electric wiring, and electric equipment and appliances. The frequency of EMFs is measured in hertz (Hz, or cycles per second). People are exposed to both electric and magnetic fields, but scientists are most concerned about magnetic fields in the range near 60 Hz – the frequency of electric power in North America.1
Workers may be exposed to high magnetic fields if they work near electrical systems that use large amounts of electric power (for example, large electric motors, generators, or the power supply or electric cables of a building). High magnetic fields are also found near power saws, drills, copy machines, electric pencil sharpeners, televisions, computer monitors and other small electric appliances. The strength of the magnetic field depends on equipment design and current flow – not on equipment size, complexity, or voltage. Though some electric equipment produces EMFs of other frequencies, most health research has concentrated only on frequencies near 60 Hz.
The EMF exposures for many jobs have not been measured, but Table 1-1 shows average exposures to magnetic fields for typical workers who use electric equipment. Exposures during a work shift vary with the strength of the magnetic field, the worker’s distance from the EMF source and the time the worker spends in the field. For comparison, the table also lists worker exposures off the job.
Studies have shown that some workers exposed to high magnetic fields have increased cancer rates, which may be due to the vibration of the cell membranes causing toxic substances to penetrate into the cell and generate various mechanisms to initiate cancer.2 The most important data comes from six recent studies of workers wearing EMF monitors to measure magnetic fields.
All but one study found significantly higher cancer rates for men with average workday exposures above 4 milligauss. However, the results of these studies disagree in important ways – such as the type of cancer associated with EMF exposures. So scientists cannot be sure whether the increased risks are caused by EMF’s or by other factors such as the synergistic effects of EMF and pollution. A few preliminary studies have also associated workplace EMF’s with breast cancer, and one study has reported a possible link between occupational EMF exposure and Alzheimer’s disease.3
The data from all of these studies are too limited for scientists to draw conclusions. However, a national research effort is under way, and more study results are expected in a few years from the United States and World Health Organizations, especially in regarding the effects upon children with the increased use of cell phones.
Because of the scientific uncertainty, no federal limits for worker exposures to EMF’s have been recommended or established in the United States. Two private organizations have developed guidelines to protect workers from the known effects of extremely high exposures (that is, those more than 1,000 times the exposures typically found in occupational environments). However, these
guidelines do not address the possible health effects of the low EMF exposures usually found on the job.
The U.S. Department of Transportation has been evaluating the health effects from EMF and Radio-Frequency Radiation (RFR) as associated with transportation systems over an emerging cross-modal issue. An emerging cross-modal transportation safety, environmental and health issue of growing national interest is the existence and nature of potentially adverse health effects from exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF’s). Of special concern to the public and Congress are magnetic fields of Extremely Low Frequency (ELF’s, from 3 to 3000 Hz or 3 KHz), a spectral range including the power grid frequency of 60 Hz, and its harmonics.
Such ELF/EMF sources and emissions are pervasive in our technological society. Common sources of environmental EMF are the same as in the work- place: power generation; transmission and distribution lines; industrial equipment and office devices; home electrical appliances and electrical transportation systems.4
Recent Public Awareness
Numerous recent studies, press articles, TV programs and movies have publicized mounting evidence for possible links between exposure to EMF’s at or near power-ine frequencies and various adverse health impacts, including cancers and reproductive effects5, 6
Research findings on bio-effects of EMF’so date, albeit controversial, have focused considerable public and governmental attention on the need for more research to resolve uncertainties and for coordinated polices, pre-regulatory actions and communications on this issue.
As a result of public pressure from consumers, some companies are adopting prudent practices, such as redesign of products (electric blankets and computer equipment), work environments and operations to minimize occupational and home exposures to electric and/or magnetic fields. Utilities have put a hold on new power liens and many are involved in litigation.
Current Epidemiological Studies
Epidemiological studies of residential and occupational exposures to EMF’s, and laboratory studies on humans, animals and cells for a wide range of EMF exposure conditions have yet to agree on a reproducible and validated causal mechanism for adverse bio-effect from chronic exposure to weak environmental EMF’s or ELF’s. Technology in these fields has grown over the last decade to expand the environmental health effects of the world.
The present state of scientific knowledge is still too rudimentary to serve as a basis for regulations or guidelines limiting emission of public and work place exposures to EMF. There are several reasons for this situation.
The specific electric and/or magnetic field characteristics that could be hazardous to people (frequency ranges, field strength, and continuous or intermittent exposure duration) are presently unknown. Nor are the metrics for “dose” of exposure linked to specific “dose response,” and the biological coupling mechanisms agreed upon.
The EMF exposure history cannot be easily separated from other confounding health factors in epidemiological studies. Life evolved in earth’s magnetic field (of order 1 Gauss); this ambient field changes continuously, due to polar wander, solar activity (magnetic storms and sunspot cycle), and induced micropulsations. The human body generates EMF’s from bio-activities and induced fields and currents in response to external EMF.
It is difficult to define the nature, extent and severity of EMF health hazards, given the variety, complexity and lack of consistency for biological responses reported by researchers. However, among the clear adverse effects found are depressed melatonin and shifts in circadian rhythms. These could adversely affect fatigue, alertness, reaction time and other physiological and behavioral factors important to transportation workers and travelers.
The increased incidence of brain tumors from cell phone users has created great concern from the public and the World Health Organization especially with the continued use of cell phones by children. A direct relationship to the vibration of the water molecule and the formation of a tumor by pollution in the area has been attributed to the increased vibration rate of heat shock proteins in that area of the brain.7
Federal Government Response
A controversial EPA report labeled “EMF A Possible Cancer Promoter” was drafted in 1990. The report has been held up by OMB and the White House, and is still undergoing revision; EPA has defined its R & D priorities on EMF in 1992, and has supported FRA on EMF issues.
The Committee on Interagency Radiation Research and Policy Coordination (CIRRPC) convened by OSTP includes representatives from EPA, DOE, FDA, DOA, OSHA/DOL, DOD, as well as DOT/RSPA. Its Science sub-panel on health effects of EMF has reviewed the current state of knowledge, to determine if regulatory actions are warranted. CIRRPC sponsored a review of EMF- related health effects in 1992: While denying that definite linkage has been proven, its report (“Health Effects of Low Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields”) identified electrified railroads as a “worst case” for EMF exposures and called for more research on the issue, since the males exposed to EMF became developed testicular cancer.8
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a research arm of CDC within HHS and OSHA, convened a 1991 workshop and defined a National Research Agenda on EMF effects in the work place. Transportation workers exposed to EMF will have to be included in occupational epidemiology studies, and NIOSH has been asked by Congress to investigate excess cancer in electrical rail workers exposed to secondary EMF. When workplace surveys will be are completed and issues of dose metrics, and health effects based on dose- response are resolved, NIOSH will recommend occupational exposure standards for EMF to OSHA.
The DOE, as the lead agency of an Interagency EMF Working Group – on which DOT/FRA was represented – has prepared a “National Strategic EMF Research Plan”, and the NAS was also asked to initiate a study and report to Congress. The 1992 Energy Policy Act (EPACT) Section 2118 mandated that the DOE and HHS/NIEHS take the lead in coordinating a $65 million; five – year public private cost shared national EMF research and public information
dissemination (RAPID) program. An interagency committee (EMF-IAC) and an advisory committee (NEMFAC) were established to guide the program so as to resolve scientific uncertainties and report to Congress in 1997. The DOT, based on the FRA R & D program on EMF assessment and health effects, is a designated participating member of the EMF-IAC.
Regulatory Status
Because of gaps and uncertainties in current knowledge on the subject, neither the EPA nor OSHA is close to promulgating regulations limiting public or occupational EMF field exposure. DOT regulations would normally follow EPA and OSHA regulations as for noise or other environmental emissions. FRA, however, had to consider EMF as part of development safety regulations for maglev and high-speed rail proposed US applications.
Other countries have already adopted public and occupational exposure interim limits of 50/60 Hz EMF. The World Health Organization and the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) International Non-Ionizing Radiation Committee (INIRC) published interim ELF/EMF Exposure Guidelines in 1990. Japan, England, Denmark, Italy and Germany are adopting similar standards. Sweden, based on recent studies linked excess cancer to EMF from residential and work exposures, is taking more drastic EMF reduction measures.
In the absence of U.S. federal guidelines, seven states have issued their own regulations limiting electric and magnetic fields at the edge of the right of way for power lines. Other states are moving in this direction, as well, while adopting “prudent avoidance” policies.
( Continued in Part II - drhildy.proboards46.com/index.cgi?board=emf&action=display&thread=1163660278 )