+OK 17304 octets Received: from smtp08.nwnexus.com (smtp08.nwnexus.com [206.63.63.42]) by mail3.halcyon.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA21670 for ; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 15:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chrome.dreamscape.com (chrome.dreamscape.com [206.64.128.4]) by smtp08.nwnexus.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA05277 for ; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 15:32:22 -0700 Received: from europa.dreamscape.com (europa.dreamscape.com [206.64.128.147]) by chrome.dreamscape.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA05807; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 18:32:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Dreamscape-Track-Chrome-A: europa.dreamscape.com [206.64.128.147] X-Dreamscape-Track-Chrome-B: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 18:32:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from default (sB1-p15.dreamscape.com [209.4.252.155]) by europa.dreamscape.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP id SAA21813; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 18:31:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Dreamscape-Track-A: sB1-p15.dreamscape.com [209.4.252.155] X-Dreamscape-Track-B: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 18:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.0.2.19990626175437.0159eca0@mail.dreamscape.com> X-Sender: fredb001@mail.dreamscape.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 18:29:26 -0400 To: 71524.2205@compuserve.com From: Fred Battey Subject: Non-Ed: Release of NIEHS Report on Electric and Magnetic Fields Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Status: All: I ran into this in an internet search on something else and though many of you might be interested. The first section below is the announcement of the report and indicates the web site where the entire report can be viewed. The second section is an executive report of the findings. The succeeding sections are sections I felt you might find of interest. Fred ____________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information Dissemination Program (EMFRAPID Program)Agency: Environmental Toxicology Program, Office of Special Programs, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. Notice: Release of NIEHS Report on Electric and Magnetic Fields. Background The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) andthe Department of Energy (DOE) coordinated implementation of the Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public InformationDissemination Program (EMFRAPID Program). This six-year program was mandated in the 1992 Energy Policy Act (PL 102-486, section 2118) and is designed to determine the potential effects on human disease from exposure to 60 Hz electric and magnetic fields (EMF). These fields are invisible lines of force that surround any wire or device that uses electricity. Additional details about the EMFRAPID Program are found in Federal Register, December 16, 1997 (Volume 62, No. 241, pp. 65814-65815). Under this program, the NIEHS conducted a two-year review and analysis of the existing scientific data on EMF and prepared a report for the U.S. Congress that contains its conclusions from the health assessment. This assessment included an evaluation of the evidence byscientists both within and outside the field of EMF research as well as an opportunity for public comment through sponsorship of public meetings and solicitation written comments. The NIEHS report was released on June 15, 1999 and is available free-of-charge to the publicand other interested parties. The report is available in both PDF and HTML formats at theEMFRAPID Program world wide website, www.niehs.nih.gov/emfrapid/home.htm. Copies of the report can also be obtained by sending a request by fax: 919-541-0144 or mail: EMF-RAPID Program, NIEHS/NIH,P.O. Box 12233 MD EC-16, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; or by calling 919-541-7534. Dated: June 18, 1999.Samuel H. Wilson, Deputy Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. ____________________________________ NIEHS Conclusion - Executive Summary The scientific evidence suggesting that ELF-EMF exposures pose any health risk is weak. The strongest evidence for health effects comes from associations observed in human populations with two forms of cancer: childhood leukemia and chronic lymphocytic leukemia in occupationally exposed adults. While the support from individual studies is weak, the epidemiological studies demonstrate, for some methods of measuring exposure, a fairly consistent pattern of a small, increased risk with increasing exposure that is somewhat weaker for chronic lymphocytic leukemia than for childhood leukemia. In contrast, the mechanistic studies and the animal toxicology literature fail to demonstrate any consistent pattern across studies although sporadic findings of biological effects (including increased cancers in animals) have been reported. No indication of increased leukemias in experimental animals has been observed. The lack of connection between the human data and the experimental data (animal and mechanistic) severely complicates the interpretation of these results. The human data are in the "right" species, are tied to "real-life" exposures and show some consistency that is difficult to ignore. This assessment is tempered by the observation that given the weak magnitude of these increased risks, some other factor or common source of error could explain these findings. However, no consistent explanation other than exposure to ELF-EMF has been identified. Epidemiological studies have serious limitations in their ability to demonstrate a cause and effect relationship whereas laboratory studies, by design, can clearly show that cause and effect are possible. Virtually all of the laboratory evidence in animals and humans and most of the mechanistic work done in cells fail to support a causal relationship between exposure to ELF-EMF at environmental levels and changes in biological function or disease status. The lack of consistent, positive findings in animal or mechanistic studies weakens the belief that this association is actually due to ELF-EMF, but it cannot completely discount the epidemiological findings. The NIEHS concludes that ELF-EMF exposure cannot be recognized as entirely safe because of weak scientific evidence that exposure may pose a leukemia hazard. In our opinion, this finding is insufficient to warrant aggressive regulatory concern. However, because virtually everyone in the United States uses electricity and therefore is routinely exposed to ELF-EMF, passive regulatory action is warranted such as a continued emphasis on educating both the public and the regulated community on means aimed at reducing exposures. The NIEHS does not believe that other cancers or non-cancer health outcomes provide sufficient evidence of a risk to currently warrant concern. The interaction of humans with ELF-EMF is complicated and will undoubtedly continue to be an area of public concern. The EMF-RAPID Program successfully contributed to the scientific knowledge on ELF-EMF through its support of high quality, hypothesis-based research. While some questions were answered, others remain. Building upon the knowledge base developed under the EMF-RAPID Program, meritorious research on ELF-EMF through carefully designed, hypothesis-driven studies should continue for areas warranting fundamental study including leukemia. Recent research in two areas, neurodegenerative diseases and cardiac diseases associated with heart rate variability, have identified some interesting and novel findings for which further study is ongoing. _____________________________________ Non-Cancer Findings in Humans The relationship between spontaneous abortion and exposure to ELF-EMF has been considered in several studies. Recent occupational and residential studies were the focus of this assessment. In the first occupational study (56), no association was observed. In a second occupational study (57), a significant association was found with exposure to high ELF-EMF; however, the response rate was very poor, particularly among controls, which could have biased this result upward. Pregnancy loss was investigated in two residential cohort studies (58, 59). In one study (58), an increased risk was observed in the highest exposure category but not in the intermediate category. In the other (59), no association was observed for any measure of exposure. In a carefully designed prospective study in the United States (60) , no association was reported between measured fields (including personal exposure monitoring) and intrauterine growth, birth weight or gestational age. Low birth weight (60, 61), intrauterine growth retardation (60), preterm birth (61) and congenital anomalies arising from the father’s exposure (62) were not associated with occupational exposures to ELF-EMF. The risk for congenital anomalies in relation to the mother’s use of heated waterbeds and electric blankets around the time of conception was evaluated in three studies(63-65); no association was observed for heated waterbeds in any study, and inconsistent results were reported for electric blanket use. The association between occupational exposure to ELF-EMF and Alzheimer’s disease was considered in five studies (66-70). All five studies showed increases in one or more exposure groups with four studies (66-69) showing statistically significant increases and one (70) showing non-statistically significant increases. All of these studies suffer from design limitations that make it inappropriate to use them for addressing a causal association between ELF-EMF exposure and Alzheimer’s disease. Two of these (66, 67) are based on diagnoses from death certificates (Alzheimer’s disease is not consistently noted on death certificates). Two studies (68, 69) used different groups of cases and controls; some of the control groups included persons with other types of dementia, and proxy information was used to define the exposure of cases. The one remaining study(70) was evaluated using data for twins and also suffered many limitations. These data are inadequate for interpreting the possibility of an association. The association between exposure to magnetic fields and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis was assessed in three studies(66, 71, 72). One study(71) showed an increased risk in the highest exposure group and the other two studies were negative. Adequate adjustment could not be made for known risk factors (electric shocks or a family history of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) making these studies difficult to interpret. Suicide and depression were studied in three occupational epidemiological studies(72-74). These studies do not support an association with ELF-EMF exposure. Two occupational studies (75, 76) assessed possible adverse cardiovascular outcomes that may result from exposure to magnetic fields. In the first study (75), a significant decrease in risk using a broadly defined cardiovascular grouping was observed. In the second (76), data from five utilities were examined. This study was motivated a priori by a biological hypothesis based on the results of human clinical studies on heart rate variability (77) for increased numbers of deaths due to arrhythmia and acute myocardial infarct. Significant, exposure-dependent associations were reported. Lacking additional epidemiological studies to collaborate these results, these data are inconclusive regarding an association between cardiovascular disease and exposure to ELF-EMF. Human clinical studies of ELF-EMF exposures were carried out mainly through three major research initiatives. These include a long series of studies of utility workers begun in the 1960s in the former USSR (37), human laboratory research conducted in the 1970s in Germany(78, 79) and the human laboratory research program started in 1982 at the Midwest Research Institute in the United States(80). Dedicated facilities for human exposure testing were designed and constructed in Australia (81), Canada (82), England(83), France(84), Germany (78), New Zealand (85), the Russian Federation (86) and the United States (87, 88). Research with human volunteers is currently under way in many of these facilities. A large number of clinical end-points were evaluated in these laboratories. Several effects reported at high exposures warrant little concern as health dangers such as hair standing on end in very strong electric fields and flickering visual sensations in very strong magnetic fields. However, a number of measurements potentially linked to health effects have been studied. The central nervous system was one of the first areas investigated as a potential site of interaction with ELF-EMF. Studies of changes in brain wave patterns (electroencephalography) during waking hours were generally negative showing little or no effect of ELF-EMF, especially in the range of power-line frequencies (79, 80, 86, 89-94). Several studies (95-97) showed decreased sleep and reduced sleep efficiency during ELF-EMF exposure. These studies all had deficiencies (e.g. disturbance of subjects by drawing blood and incomplete adaptation of study subjects to the laboratory environment) making them inconclusive. Changes in human pulse as a function of exposure to ELF-EMF fall into two categories: changes in the number of beats per minute (pulse rate) and changes in the variability of the electro-chemical signals going to the heart (heart-rate variability). Two research groups examined changes in pulse rate following exposure to ELF-EMF (80, 91-93, 98, 99). All five clinical studies (80, 91-93, 99) from the same laboratory showed a decrease in pulse rate in at least one exposure group; however, all exposures represented rather large, combined electric and magnetic fields (6 to 12 kV/m and 10 to 30 mT, respectively). The remaining study (98) was a field trial under a high-tension power line and no effect was observed. The biological mechanism is unknown, and the general effect is very small making it unlikely that this is a health risk at lower doses. Changes in heart-rate variability were evaluated in a retrospective analysis of three previous studies (77). Some changes in heart-rate variability were observed, which according to the authors, could indicate a potential for increased risk of sudden cardiovascular death. However, even though decreased heart-rate variability is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death, it is not clear that transiently induced changes in healthy individuals will carry any risk. While these findings are inconclusive, the recent epidemiological result (76) discussed earlier suggests this area may warrant additional study. Two possible mechanistic explanations for cancer findings from exposure to ELF-EMF, changes in melatonin (a hormone associated with sleep) and changes in the immune system, have been studied. The potential for ELF-EMF exposure to alter nighttime melatonin levels was addressed in 11 studies (81, 84, 96, 100-106). The clinical studies (81, 84, 96, 102, 103) demonstrated no consistent pattern of melatonin reduction (one study saw a marginal effect in men with already reduced melatonin levels and one saw a reduction in onset of the nightly increase in melatonin). In the occupational studies (100, 101, 105, 106), some changes were reported in urinary excretion of melatonin metabolites (the result of degradation of melatonin in the body) following workplace exposure (when melatonin levels are generally low), but not in evening melatonin levels. In the one residential study (104), significant dose-related reductions were associated with measured fields in bedrooms, but not with other measures (e.g. wire codes and total 72-hour exposure). All combined, these studies provide little support that exposure to ELF-EMF is altering melatonin levels in humans. A number of other hormones were also studied such as testosterone, thyroid hormones and several stress hormones; no effects of ELF-EMF exposure on these levels were observed. Few laboratories studied the effects of ELF-EMF on the immune system. Three studies investigated effects of ELF-EMF exposure on the immune system (80, 107, 108) and all were negative. Finally, there have been a number of case reports of mood changes and hypersensitivity thought attributable to ELF-EMF exposure (manifested as physiological reactions, disturbed sleep, fatigue, headaches, loss of concentration, dizziness, eye strain and skin problems). These symptoms generally seem to be intermittent and difficult to study clinically. Several carefully designed studies (109-113) were performed to evaluate the response of persons with these symptoms to ELF-EMF. In general, these studies were negative with the exception of one (112) that reported an increased incidence of skin rashes in persons exposed to high ambient electric fields (>31 V/m) relative to control fields (<10 V/m). These data are insufficient to support an association between ELF-EMF and hypersensitivity. .