Government regulatory agency exposure limits versus biological effect precautionary levels
The exposure threshold levels to EMF, that Building Biology, as well as levels advocated by the scientists who contributed to the BioInitiative report, can be described as precautionary, prudent avoidance,guidelines, that are based on the current known science. It should be noted that there are court rulings in Europe that have recognized and applied Building Biology Institute standards. The US government on the other hand, bases it's exposure limits for non ionizing electromagnetic radiation on something called the "Thermal Effect" standard. This means that unless the non Ionizing EMF is sufficiently intense so as to produce direct heating of body tissue, the government does not recognize it as a biological hazard.
The published science however tells us a different story. Namely, that there are significant, deleterious,adverse, biological effects, at levels that are orders of magnitude lower than what the government deems safe. This has been demonstrated in studies on plants,insects,animals,and human beings. This has most recently been highlighted in a lawsuit against the FCC with regards to their Radio Frequency Radiation exposure standards. In that lawsuit, the Children's Health Defense Organization filed an appendix with 11,000 pages of scientific studies demonstrating negative biological effects at levels far below the FCC regulatory limits. The links to those 27 volumes of studies can be found here: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/landmark-5g-case-against-fcc-hearing-set-jan-25/
The Bioinitiative was a report first put together in 2007, by a group of 30 independent, international scientists and doctors. They were concerned about regulatory inaction in protecting the public from this harmful and increasing environmental exposure. The report has since been updated in 2012 and again in 2020 and can be found here: https://bioinitiative.org/
The scientists who compiled the Bioinitiative report volunteered their own time and dime to get it done and it was a real public service. It consists of thousands of pages of studies with thousands of citations.There is a conclusions section with recommendations for public policy and exposure threshold levels for Radio Frequency Radiation and Alternating Current Magnetic Fields. The link for that section is here: https://bioinitiative.org/conclusions/
Electric Fields
In addition to AC magnetic fields and RF radiation, The Building Biology Institute has promoted the importance of lowering the electric field that is associated with the voltage from building wiring. The strength of the electric field can be approximated by measuring the voltage it induces on the skin, also known as body voltage. An electric field can also be measured directly and more accurately as volts per meter by using an electric field meter.The Building Biology Institute has pointed to over 30 years of experience using techniques to lower skin/body voltage/electric field and has reported dramatic improvements in the health of clients who do this.
A startling discovery
In 2010 Dr. Sam Milham published a book titled "Dirty Electricity". Dirty Electricity and Dirty Power, are electric power industry terms used to describe voltage transients or spikes, that corrupt the 60 Hertz Electromagnetic sinusoidal wave form of electrical power. Dr Milham in his book and in numerous scientific papers makes the case, that It is electricity and especially the Dirty Electricity component of Electrical power that is the prime suspect and key culprit behind epidemiological evidence linking emf to all the modern diseases of civilization. He published a compelling epidemiological study in 2010 that can be linked to here http://sammilham.com/historical%20evidence.pdf
In this study Dr Milham demonstrates how all modern diseases such as Diabetes,Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer,Depression,Suicide, Obesity, and others, are all strongly associated with electrification.The high rate of disease burden in electrified areas compared to not yet electrified areas, in the first half of the 20th century is striking. In his book, Dr. Milham contrasts the Health of the Amish Community and particularly the Old Order Amish who do not use electricity in their homes, with the general population.On page 78 in his book He makes the bold statement that "If the rest of the US population had the disease incidence and prevalence of the Old Order Amish, the US medical care and pharmaceutical industries would collapse".
The implications of Dr. Milham's research and conclusions are indeed startling and should have warranted a major focus by government agencies concerned with public health.It turns out though, that governments and industry have been working hard for many decades to misdirect the public on the health risks found with magnetic fields,electric fields, radio frequency radiation, and dirty electricity. Here is a link to a scathing 2009 article by Dr. Louis Slesin https://www.microwavenews.com/node/37
in which he exposes and excoriates the "Junk Science" put out by industry.
In short, there is a disconnect between what the science points to as being hazardous and what government regulatory agencies consider to be hazardous and worthy of regulation. Numerous authors have documented how government regulatory inaction is due to opposition and pressure from the Military, Electric Power Industry, and Telecommunications industry.
Some history
In order to have context and better understanding of the various exposure threshold guidelines put forth by scientists, and organizations, a little recap of some history is helpful.
In 1979, Dr. Nancy Wertheimer and Physicist Ed Leeper published an epidemiological study done on childhood cancer rates in Denver, Colorado. The study was titled Electrical Wiring Configurations And Childhood Cancer. Here is a link to the full study. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi8yonf8Kj5AhV-KlkFHaUaAjkQFnoECAIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jrseco.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FWertheimer_Leeper_ELECTRICAL_WIRING_CONFIGURATIONS_AND_CHILDHOOD_CANCER.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2-MOhPW6pc6UxfqDKLW3UF
This study demonstrated an unexpected association of increased rates of cancer in children living in homes in proximity to 1st and 2nd span wires of local secondary distribution lines. Those are the lines that run from the transformer, and supply the electricity to your home. The study had originally meant to look for possible Leukemia clusters associated with Onco-viruses. The surprise finding was attributed to the AC magnetic field generated by the electric current, as opposed to the electric field generated by the electric voltage. This was because the electric field intensity was presumed to be the same in all homes due to there being no variance in the voltage on the power lines.The magnetic field intensity on the other hand would be expected to vary based on the amount of current flowing through the lines.There is more current flowing on the 1st and 2nd spans of line, near the local transformer, and less current as you get further away from the transformer further down the line.
This 1979 Wertheimer Leeper study was followed by many other studies the majority of them showing the same association between AC Magnetic Fields and Cancer.
In this occupational study done on electric utility workers in Canada, and published in 1996 a strong association was found between lung cancer and Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (PEMF). These PEMFs are similar to High frequency voltage transients of Dirty Electricity.
This study was supposed to be about the 60 Hertz Magnetic fields, not electric fields or dirty electricity. The scientist who led the study was so disturbed by the findings that he felt obligated to release this information which he did. Hydro Quebec which commissioned the study claimed breach of contract and demanded the raw data not be released. The story of how the data from this study was embargoed and permanently hidden by the utility, Hydro Quebec, is related in this article in Microwave News
https://microwavenews.com/news/backissues/n-d94issue.pdf
In this study on Leukemia and Electric fields also published in 1996 with the Hydro Quebec data, an association was shown between 60 Hertz Electric fields and adult forms of Leukemia.
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/144/2/150/112154?login=true
In the 1990s, the U.S. Federal government commissioned an expensive study on EMF. That program was named EMF RAPID which stands for Research and Public Information and Dissemination Program. When the program concluded in 1999, the government decided that there was "insufficient evidence" of enough widespread health issues to "justify aggressive regulatory action". However,the RAPID report was a whitewash from the get-go. All of the scientists on this project, with the exception of Dr. Andrew Marino, were recipients of funding from the power industry. Marino was the only independent researcher and he critiques the process here https://www.andrewamarino.com/PDFs/F176.4-NIEHS_EMF-RAPID_Report.pdf
It appears that the RAPID report was used to end the funding of research in the US into biological effects from electromagnetism. The research did continue around the world not just on magnetic fields, but also on electric fields, microwave radiation from wireless devices, and dirty electricity. Most of the world has ostensibly adopted the notion of the precautionary principle which essentially states that the burden of proof of safety for a potential environmental toxin, rests on the industry that produces it and not on the citizens to prove that it is unsafe. This means that if there is a reasonable expectation of potential harm from something like an AC magnetic field or RF radiation , it should not be introduced into the environment and should be regarded as unsafe until proven safe.
Unfortunately, and tragically, the government regulatory mechanisms that should have protected the public from these exposures, have failed. As far as human health and EMFs, you are on your own in finding ways to protect yourself.
The Building Biology approach has been to use Nature as the guide, and aims to bring your indoor EMF environment to levels as close to nature and As Low As Reasonably Achievable - the ALARA principle. The Building Biology position is that any reduction in EMF is worthwhile and beneficial even if it is not a total and complete reduction.
Building Biology has developed an exposure guideline table that breaks down the levels into 4 categories,No Risk,Slight Risk ,Severe Risk and Extreme Risk. Here is a link to the page on the Safe Living Technologies website that has combined the Building Biology guidelines with the recommendations of the BioInitiative Report. There are also additional tables comparing different exposure threshold limits around the world.
https://safelivingtechnologies.com/emf-exposure-rf-exposure-guidelines/
The institute of building biology guidelines mentioned above are for sleeping areas. Building Biology promotes the notion that it is beneficial to turn your sleeping area into a sleep sanctuary. The idea is that restful sleep is restorative and regenerative and essential for good health. Emf's like visible light can interfere with the pineal gland's production of melatonin. According to Dr. Devra Davis, normal melatonin production will undo 98 percent of the oxidative stress damage your body incurs during the day. Many people find that when they lower their exposure to EMFs in their sleep area. they are able to sleep better, their insomnia goes away and they are able to achieve REM state sleep and start dreaming again.
There has been a general recommendation of a one milliGauss exposure threshold for several decades. Below are several sources for the one milliGauss exposure threshold level that has been advocated by various scientists and organizations since the 1980s.
The Institute of Building Biology considers AC magnetic fields between 1 and 5 milliGauss to be of severe concern or a severe anomaly and above 5 milliGauss to be an extreme concern or extreme anomaly. This information can be found at this link. https://buildingbiology.com/site/downloads/richtwerte-2015-englisch.pdf
The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) states that a 0.3 microTesla magnetic field - the equivalent of a 3 milliGauss field - increases the risk of childhood leukemia two fold. Here is their statement which can be found at this link https://www.who.int/teams/environment-climate-change-and-health/radiation-and-health/non-ionizing/elff
"Much of the scientific research examining long-term risks from ELF magnetic field exposure has focused on childhood leukemia. In 2002, IARC published a monograph classifying ELF magnetic fields as "possibly carcinogenic to humans". This classification is used to denote an agent for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity in experimental animals (other examples include coffee and welding fumes). This classification was based on pooled analyses of epidemiological studies demonstrating a consistent pattern of a two-fold increase in childhood leukemia associated with average exposure to residential power-frequency magnetic field above 0.3 to 0.4 µT (3 to 4 milliGauss). The Task Group concluded that additional studies since then do not alter the status of this classification".
The Bio Initiative Report Advocates for a 1 milliGauss limit for Magnetic Field exposure as shown below from page 7 of the conclusions section and found here https://bioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/section_1_table_1_2012.pdf EVIDENCE FOR CHILDHOOD CANCERS (LEUKEMIA)
"With overall 42 epidemiological studies published to date, power frequency EMFs are among the most comprehensively studied environmental factors. Except ionizing radiation no other environmental factor has been as firmly established to increase the risk of childhood leukemia. There is sufficient evidence from epidemiological studies of an increased risk from exposure to EMF (power frequency magnetic fields) that cannot be attributed to chance, bias or confounding. Therefore, according to the rules of IARC such exposures can be classified as a Group 1 carcinogen (Known Carcinogen). There is no other risk factor identified so far for which such unlikely conditions have been put forward to postpone or deny the necessity to take steps towards exposure reduction. As one step in the direction of precaution, measures should be implemented to guarantee that exposure due to transmission and distribution lines are below an average of about 1 mG. This value is arbitrary at present and only supported by the fact that in many studies this level has been chosen as a reference"
Dr. Robert O. Becker in the book Cross Currents, on page 271 advocates 1 milliGauss for practical considerations but on page 270 says that applying a risk protection factor of 10, to the 3 milliGauss level would drop the theoretical safe level down to 0.3 milliGauss. The institute of Building Biology recommends a level of 0.2 milliGauss or lower, as a no risk range.
Studies on Radio Frequency Radiation
Here are links to two oft cited studies that show strong relationships between RF radiation and a whole host of health issues including Cancer.
1.The Sutro Tower study from 2002 covering the years 1973 to 1988 https://core.ac.uk/reader/35464890 by Dr. Neil Cherry.
2. The Selbitz, Bavaria study published in 2010 by Horst Eger and Manfred Jahn https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxub2NlbGx0b3dlcmlub3VybmVpZ2hib3Job29kfGd4OjFiMDg5Yzk0ZWE3Y2U0Y2U
Copyright © 2022 NYC EMF Assesment and Mitigation - All Rights Reserved.
emftesting.nyc
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.