TT:
I'm sorry I raised this topic, frankly.
Craig Clark is correct, there are no studies proving correlation
between AC fields and any disease process. K6XN is correct, there
are several ""post hoc ergo propter hoc"...or..."after the fact
therefore on account of the fact"" annecdotal arguments floating
around which have been seized by ill informed fanatics.
That said, some 15 years ago, there was an RF safety presentation
done at Dayton by a ham and physician, who observed that there WAS
a rat/mice study done on AC fields. He observed that the data from
that study correlated 60Hz fields with several diseases in the rats,
including some cancers. His conclusion was....your electric blanket
is far more dangerous to you than your ham station.
C. Ross Adey, an oncologist and a ham, was on a plane flying out of
Shanghai with me, in 1981. A coincidental meeting. In the conversation,
he confirmed what Craig said...lambasted a few "post-hoc, ergo..."
fanatics...but said he was more concerned about 50-60Hz electric fields
than non-ionizing RF.
So...correlation? NO. But, I'll tell you what, if I can FEEL when I'm
walking under a 138KV line, I'm damned sure not living under it.
Just because it hasn't been conclusively proven doesn't mean it's not a
health risk. Or...tell you what, I'll volunteer to be in the control group
while YOU live under the HV line, and let's see what happens in 20 years.
:)
I liked the post with the DMM readings on the guardrail. Nice to see some
data,
for a change. Gives one pause.
n2ea
jimjarvis@ieee.org
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|