Last month, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) decided that there was no conclusive or consistent evidence that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) cause cancer.
As the NAS pointed out, some EMF studies report a risk; others do not. Although study techniques have improved over the last 20 years, study results remain as confusing as ever.
One key reason for the NAS' conclusion is the lack of evidence regarding the biological mechanism by which EMFs could possibly cause cancer. [Maybe that's because EMFs don't cause cancer!]
Now, French researchers report that, based on their study of 170,000 French utility company workers, electric fields were associated with a threefold increase in brain cancer risk (relative risk = 3.08, 95 percent confidence interval 1.08 - 8.74).
Of course they did acknowledge that
...little is known about the etiology of this tumor.
This is exactly the situation addressed by the NAS. Although the French study did happen to report an association, there are many other studies that contradict its results. And still no advancement on the biological mechanism issue.
Not that I'm recommending this, but, if public health researchers are really bent on linking EMFs with health effects, why don't they stop wasting their time (and our money) on epidemiology studies? Why not work on the biological mechanism issue?
Epidemiology has likely taken us as far as it can on the EMF issue. And after almost two decades of research, we may be at that point with the biological mechanism research as well. If so, shouldn't EMF researchers re-evaluate their career goals? Wouldn't that be shocking?
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of the author.
Copyright © 1996 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved. Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.