Electromagnetic Fields Erring on the side of Caution by
Dr Chris Barnes Bangor Scientific and Educational Consultants
Abstract
A very brief
review of sources of common Electromagnetic fields is presented. Considerations
and mechanisms for fields to be classed as Geno-toxic
are reviewed. The existence of conflicting information and results is
highlighted. Reasons for such conflict are suggested. New proposals for Epidemiologists are made
based on more through understandings of electromagnetic radiation. Lifestyle in the Amish Community is
considered to reinforce the point that we should all err on the side of caution
in the use of electromagnetic systems and fields.
Introduction
The past few
decades have seen an explosion in the use of electromagnetic technologies. We have also seen in explosion in ADHD,
autism, Alzheimer’s and numerous common
types of Cancer. Surely it is only
pertinent to ask if there could be a connection.
Mobile phone
and WIFI signals pervade all our physical space. TV and radio stations transmit 24/7 without a
break. Power systems radiate more
harmonics and inter-harmonics than ever before.
Even the insides of our cars are moderately strong sources of magnetic
fields as all their electrical systems are ECU and PWM controlled.
MRI body
scanners expose some of us to magnetic fields powerful enough to break the
covalent bonds between biogenic magnetite and organic pathways in our
brains.
Artists light
up fluorescent tubes by planting them in fields under super-grid power
lines
But why be
alarmed. Any good PR man in your Power
Company or mobile phone shop will tell you “A quantum of Electro-magnetic
radiation doesn’t pack enough punch to break a strand of DNA like an X-RAY or
something similar”
Of course
they would be right but maybe they should add just one more key word. Here is the same sentence revisited “ A quantum of Electromagnetic radiation doesn’t pack enough
punch to directly break a strand of
DNA......”
An
alternative is to ask what if DNA expression of a cell is changed? Is that or can that not have mutagenic
effect?
Various
mechanisms have been put forward for this including stimulation of heat shock
proteins and interference with ion channel gating. Work on cellular and animal models by independent scientists generally seems to
provide associative results whereas work funded by power companies, mobile
phone company’ s and large public information bodies seems to come up with
negative results. The reader is asked to draw their own conclusions here given the
wealth generation of the industries concerned.
Of those more
certain conclusions, electromagnetic fields
and RF radiation have been associated with Leukaemia (Ha et al 2007),Glioma (Kan et al 2007) and Non-hodgkins Lymphoma (Linet
2006).
Neuro-physiological
effects have also been noted as being real but small but not understood.
The present
author believes it is sad that that so much misguided information is available
concerning the safety or otherwise of EM fields to flaws in current thinking in
both biology and electromagnetism.
Only an
interdisciplinary approach will properly solve these problems. Molecular
biologists need to embrace quantum physics and vice versa. Perhaps if Frolich
were still alive the issue would be solved once and for all be now. The author believes the work of retired magnetics expert Professor Cyril Smith also sheds
incredible light on the problems at hand and so too Joseph Kirschvink
for his pioneering work on magnetite in insect, avian and human tissue.
Epidemiology Flawed current thinking
Another
approach to testing if electromagnetic fields might be harmful to humans has
been by the use of epidemiological studies.
It seems to the present author that by
far and above the largest flaw in current thinking is that most
epidemiologists cannot or will not or do
not accept anything other than an inverse square law model for the attenuation
of radio frequency radiation around a transmitting site. But then why shouldn’t they? It is conveniently pedalled by those who
won’t to perpetuate the technology and by most Physics and Engineering books.
Main beam and SSL
The truth of
the matter is rather different. All
transmitting antennas have a radiation pattern which comprises a main beam and
SSL (Secondary Side Lobes). For this
reason alone a geometric influence in the epidemiology ought to be presumed and
hence Bayesian statistics should be employed.
Similarly
know refraction, diffraction and muti-path effects of
r.f. fields could also be built into the Bayesian
algorithm.
The late Neil
Cherry is believed to be one of the only scientists working this field besides
Smith and the present author who appreciated this issue.
Quantum mechanics and a full
understanding of Electro-dynamics.
Cherry’s
results show number trends in disease fluctuating with geometric patterns with
distance from transmitting antennas as expected by SSL theory but yet with these numbers exceeding expectations at
the larger distances in terms of
weakening measured field strength.
The author believes this can only be fully explained in terms of the
electromagnetic Aaronhov
Bohm effect.
Since Clark Maxwell himself founded his electromagnetic equations many
have striven for a more complete explanation.
One such explanation has recently been derived which in addition to the
normal TEM wave proposes the existence of both an LES wave and magnetic vector
potential. The present author has
discussed their significance elsewhere (GB 1113174.5 A method and apparatus for
more accurate prediction of locations in the vicinity of transmitting antennas
or base stations wherein occupants or other life forms face maximum deleterious
bio-effect), but
basically one would expect highly spatial and geometric effects of the type
observed by Cherry. The equations
needed to predict positions of maximum wave-matter are actually quite trivial
and would be ideal for feeding into a Bayesian analysis algorithm wherein the
whole quantum hypothesis could be rigorously
tested.
The Amish Community and Cancer
The Amish
Community of North America has been shown to have up to 40% less cancers than
the surrounding population in the non-Amish community. Whereas reduced sexual promiscuity (ref) and
less or no tobacco use accounts for specific cancers (refs) the authors of a
major publication (ref) nevertheless reach the conclusion that other lifestyle
choices are relevant and may ‘require further in-depth epidemiological
studies.’
For the
present author the obvious question raised is how much of the reduction in
cancers is due to the Amish not using electricity or electrical appliances of
any kind?
Amish Transport ( modern) 
Original
Of course one
cannot rule out the fact that without the convenience of electrical appliances
the Amish will throughout their lifetimes engage in a considerable amount more
physical activity than the rest of society and a link has been shown between
physical activity and a lower risk of lung, oral, esophageal, stomach, and colon cancer (Byers et al 2008) and to give a lower
risk of prostate cancer (Whittemore et al (1995) and
a 14% lower risk of breast cancer Tiernan et al
(2003).
Amish agriculture
Amish house lighting
It would seem that even when
exercise and smoking and sexual health factors are taken into account the Amish
might possibly still have significantly lower cancer rates than the rest of
society. Electromagnetic radiation or rather the lack of it may be the
link? Although radio TV and data
communications are not used directly by the Amish it would seem by their very
proliferation that some Amish homes will now lie directly within propagation
paths. In that case it would seem there exists an ideal opportunity
for the application of Bayesian statistics which take the same into account in
any forthcoming and more advanced epidemiological; studies.
The author and doubtless eventually
the World will watch with baited breath.
Acknowledgments
The other wishes to thank his wife
and son for interesting discussions on this topic and also Emeritus Professor
Cyril Smith.