Betreff: Leukemia...high voltage lines..why more investigation needed
Von: JCMPelican@aol.com
Datum: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 16:36:16 EDT
An: olle.johansson@ki.se


Dear Olle:   This study has been distributed years ago but in looking it over, it is obvious that "other situations" must be considered when conducting epidemiological research re EMF/EMR.   You know that, of course, but I was surprised to notice the emphasis placed on this concern by Drs. Bowman and Thomas.
 
The statement:  "...... Until such potential confounders and effect modifiers in the EMF environment are measured, epidemiologic studies will have trouble clarifying EMF's unsatisfactory status as a 'possible carcinogen' "   [emphasis added by jcmueller 10 21 06] helps to elucidate the importance of evaluating numbers of children with Leukemia (also adults with Leukemia) who sleep close to electrical appliances such as electric clocks, clock radios, electric meters, small fans, power supply boxes for cordless phones, etc.
 
You, have stated many times your willingness to confirm findings such as the rare immune deficiencies in my two grandsons due to electric meter exposures, as well as drastic white blood cell changes in my guinea pigs due to electric meter exposures.
 
You also have also acknowledged that "markers for irradiation" whether low dose, chronic, prolonged ionizing radiation or low dose, chronic, prolonged nonionizing radiation are the same.
 
The problem for the world is that confirmation of those facts is not forthcoming because funding for scientists is controlled by government and industry officials who do not want such information published.  The people are therefor being denied vital information that they need in order to live healthy lives in our ever-increasing "Blue World" -- that of increasing toxic pollution within persons' homes, schools and businesses, much of which is also due to close placement of high voltage powerlines, cellular and other telecommunications' antennae, and more including increasing use of cell phones.
 
Children and parents living in the industrialized world depend upon a scientist with the honesty and integrity you have demonstrated over the years to conduct meaningful, conclusive studies -- particularly the much-needed white blood cell changes that lead to the development of rare immune deficiences and Leukemia.  
 
As you know, white blood cell changes also promote all sorts of inflammation-related health problems prior to the development of Leukemia.  The overall costs to society for not dealing apropriately and honestly -- "proper scientific studies," is enormous!!!
 
My purpose in writing this email to you (with copies for others) is to reaffirm reasons why funding for you is essential in order to proceed with the much-needed "blood studies."   I plan to include this email along with your interview "Mysteries in Skin" and several other pertinent items in making a major funding request on your behalf.
 
Best wishes and take care  -  Joanne
 
Joanne C. Mueller
Guinea Pigs R Us
731 - 123rd Avenue N.W.
Minneapolis, Minnesota  55448-2127 USA
Phone:   763-755-6114
Email:    jcmpelican@aol.com  (10-21-06)
 

"No substance is a poison by itself. It is the dose that makes a substance a poison..."  Paracelsus (1493-1541)

 


Betreff: Leukemia....high voltage lines....why may be bedroom specific..jcm comment 10 06
Von: JCMPelican@aol.com
Datum: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:49:30 EDT


 

 [jcm note 10 20 06....Epidem study indications are that there is a definite need for studies that focus on electrical items close to beds (and/or wiring errors, high magnetic fields on waterpipes in ceiling or under floors of beds, high frequencies on electrical wiring, etc.) -- I would think evaluating children/persons' health problems if sleeping close to electric clocks, etc. incl power supply boxes for cordless phones should be very high priority considerations......]
American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 153, No. 6 : 615-617
Copyright © 2001 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

RE: "ARE CHILDREN LIVING NEAR HIGH-VOLTAGE POWER LINES AT INCREASED RISK OF ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKEMIA?"

Joseph D. Bowman and Duncan C. Thomas

Engineering and Physical Hazards Branch Division of Applied Science and Technology National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Cincinnati, OH 45226–1998
Department of Preventive Medicine School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA 90033–9987


   INTRODUCTION
 
A recent article by Kleinerman et al. (1Go) uses an "exposure index" similar to a model for residential magnetic field exposures that we developed (2Go). Magnetic fields predicted by our model were associated with childhood leukemia (odds ratio = 2.00 in the highest exposure group, 95 percent confidence interval: 1.03, 3.89, p for trend = 0.02) (3Go), while Kleinerman et al. were unable to find an association (odds ratio for a continuous exposure variable = 0.95, 95 percent confidence interval: 0.78, 1.16).

Potential explanations for these conflicting results are worth discussing because the carcinogenicity of electric and magnetic fields (EMF) is unresolved (4Go). This letter focuses on two possible reasons: 1) differences in the two methods for assessing residential magnetic field exposures; and 2) unmeasured EMF characteristics, which could be effect modifiers or confounders. Epidemiologic biases that might explain these discrepancies are discussed elsewhere (3Go, 5Go).

Compared with the diverse methods used in the EMF epidemiologic literature (5Go), these two studies have much in common: Both reanalyzed case-control datasets, but from different regions (6Go, 7Go). Both measured residential magnetic fields and collected wiring configuration data. The wiring data were inputs for both exposure models, whose mathematical forms were derived from the same physical principles (8Go, 9Go).

The most striking difference between the two studies is their exposure model. In the paper by Kleinerman et al., the foremost independent variable of the exposure index is the horizontal distance from the subject's residence to nearby power lines. Parameters representing the average currents in different kinds of transmission and primary distribution lines were "based on [their] experience and best judgment" (1, p. 513).

In our exposure model, current parameters were calibrated by regression against magnetic fields measured in a subset of residences. Our regression model used additional wiring variables, such as secondary distribution lines, number of transformers, service drops between lines and homes, etc., and the term for each line had 1/r or1/r2 dependence with distance in keeping with theory (8Go). Stepwise regressions were conducted for both electric utilities servicing our study region. Since the current parameters vary greatly with the location of the home in the distribution system, their calibration for nearby wire configurations improved the accuracy of our magnetic field model. Having separate models for the two utilities reflects their different methods of grounding and transformer wiring, which further increased the correlation with measurements from 0.35 to 0.43 (2Go).

In contrast, Kleinerman et al. used the same exposure formula for all homes and utilities in a study covering nine states. Although their paper did not report correlations with measurements, the simplicity of their index would seem to create greater exposure assessment errors, increasing chances for a false-negative result.

Another explanation for inconsistent findings from EMF epidemiology is unmeasured field characteristics that may be effect modifiers. To date, epidemiologic studies have mostly assessed exposures to one magnetic field property, the root-mean-squared vector magnitude with frequencies of alternating-current electricity (5Go). The field's frequency spectrum, polarization, spatial orientation, and high-frequency transients have never been measured in human health studies, even though these characteristics are reported to affect biologic processes in laboratory and/or theoretic studies (10Go). Since magnetic field characteristics vary widely between homes (11Go), these unmeasured exposure variables could be modifying the cancer risks associated with the root-mean-squared magnetic field magnitude, producing seemingly inconsistent results in different populations. Most recently, residential magnetic fields have been associated with contact currents (or "microshocks") from the electrical grounding system of a house, which could adversely affect a child's hemopoiesis (12Go). Until such potential confounders and effect modifiers in the EMF environment are measured, epidemiologic studies will have trouble clarifying EMF's unsatisfactory status as a "possible carcinogen" (4Go, 5Go).


   REFERENCES
 

  1. Kleinerman RA, Kaune WT, Hatch EE, et al. Are children living near high-voltage power lines at increased risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia? Am J Epidemiol 2000;151:512–15.[Abstract]
  2. Bowman JD, Thomas DC, Liangzhong J, et al. Residential magnetic fields predicted from wiring configurations. I. Exposure model. Bioelectromagnetics 1999;20:399–413.[ISI][Medline]
  3. Thomas DC, Bowman JD, Liangzhong J, et al. Residential magnetic fields predicted from wiring configurations. II. Relationship to childhood leukemia. Bioelectromagnetics 1999;20:414–22.[ISI][Medline]
  4. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Health effects from exposure to power-line frequency electric and magnetic fields. Research Triangle Park, NC: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 1999. (NIH publication no. 99–4493).
  5. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Working Group. Assessment of health effects from exposure to power-line frequency electric and magnetic fields. Research Triangle Park, NC: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 1998:9–78, 167–89. (NIH publication no. 98–3981).
  6. Linet MS, Hatch EE, Kleinerman RA, et al. Residential exposure to magnetic fields and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 1997:337:1–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. London SJ, Thomas DC, Bowman JD, et al. Exposure to residential electric and magnetic fields and risk of childhood leukemia. Am J Epidemiol 1991;134:923–37.[Abstract]
  8. Kaune WT, Zaffanella LE. Analysis of magnetic fields produced far from power lines. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 1994;2:149–70.
  9. Kaune WT, Stevens RG, Callahan NJ, et al. Residential magnetic and electric fields. Bioelectromagnetics 1987;8:315–35.[ISI][Medline]
  10. Bowman JD, Gailey PC, Gillette L, et al., eds. Proceedings of a Joint NIOSH/DOE Workshop on "EMF Exposure Assessment and Epidemiology: Hypotheses, Metrics, and Measurements". Report PB-2000–101086. Arlington, VA: National Technical Information Service, 1999.
  11. Bracken TD, Rankin RF, Senior RS, et al. Association of wire code configuration with long-term average 60-Hz magnetic field exposure. Report TR-111767. Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute, 1998.
  12. Kavet R, Zaffanella LE, Daigle JP, et al. The possible role of contact current in cancer risk associated with residential magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics 2000;21:538–53.[ISI][Medline]
 

SIX OF THE AUTHORS REPLY

Ruth A. Kleinerman, Martha S. Linet, Robert E. Tarone, Sholom Wacholder, William T. Kaune and Elizabeth E. Hatch

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics National Cancer Institute Rockville, MD 20892
EM Factors Richland, WA 99352
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Boston University School of Public Health Boston, MA 02118


   INTRODUCTION 
TOP
 INTRODUCTION
 REFERENCES
 INTRODUCTION 
REFERENCES 
 
Bowman and Thomas (1Go) cite two concerns about a residential magnetic field exposure index based on distance from homes to overhead transmission and three-phase primary distribution power lines that we used to evaluate childhood leukemia risk: 1) the simplicity of our model, and 2) the possible importance of unmeasured magnetic field characteristics. In our study conducted in nine Midwestern and mid-Atlantic States, we found no evidence of a positive association between leukemia risk and a magnetic field exposure index based on distance (2Go). In a reanalysis of data from a study in Los Angeles, Bowman et al. previously found a twofold risk for childhood leukemia in a high exposure group defined by a magnetic field exposure index based on distance (3Go) that was more complex than the one we used. Bowman and Thomas suggest that the different epidemiologic results in Los Angeles and the nine-state study might be explained by the models used or differences in unmeasured magnetic field characteristics between the two studies.

As Bowman and Thomas point out, the mathematical forms of both models were derived from the same general physical principles (4Go). Our exposure model was simpler than theirs because we chose to focus solely on transmission and distribution lines, the types of lines that generally emit the strongest magnetic fields (5Go). Along with these types of power lines, Bowman et al. also included secondary distribution lines and service drops in their model.

Bowman and Thomas used residential magnetic field measurements from their dataset to determine the values of several parameters incorporated in their model, that is, to essentially "tune" their model for the homes in their study. We did not follow this course, but instead utilized an "expert estimate" of the relative strengths of the magnetic fields produced by the average transmission and three-phase primary lines to select the key parameter in our model. We used this approach based on simplicity and experience with an earlier model developed by one of us (4Go). The earlier, more complex model did not predict magnetic fields for residences other than the original 43 homes in Seattle, Washington, for which the model was developed. Furthermore, it was not feasible for us to separately tune our model for the geographic regions within the nine-state area that were served by more than 100 different utility companies.

Unmeasured magnetic field characteristics may be effect modifiers, as Bowman and Thomas suggest, but any notable influence on the risk of childhood leukemia from any postulated effect modifier has yet to be demonstrated (6Go). We recently reanalyzed the nine-state study results on field measurements (7Go) by using a variety of magnetic field metrics, including rate of change, peak exposures, and measures of short-term variability (8Go). We oncluded (7Go, 8Go) that there is little evidence of an association between any measure of magnetic fields and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (8Go).


   REFERENCES 
 

  1. Bowman JD, Thomas DC. Re: "Are children living near high-voltage power lines at increased risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia?" (Letter). Am J Epidemiol 2000:153:615–16.[Free Full Text]
  2. Kleinerman RA, Kaune WT, Hatch EE, et al. Are children living near high-voltage power lines at increased risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia? Am J Epidemiol 2000;151:512–15.[Abstract]
  3. Bowman JD, Thomas DC, Liangzhong J, et al. Residential magnetic fields predicted from wiring configurations. I. Exposure model. Bioelectromagnetics 1999;20:399–413.[ISI][Medline]
  4. Kaune WT, Stevens RG, Callahan NJ, et al. Residential magnetic and electric fields. Bioelectromagnetics 1987;8:315–35.[ISI][Medline]
  5. Zafanella LE. Survey of residential magnetic field sources. Vol. 1. Goals, results, and conclusions. Report TR-102759-VI. Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute, 1993.
  6. Ahlbom A, Day N, Feychting M, et al. A pooled analysis of magnetic fields and childhood leukemia. Br J Cancer 2000;83:692–8.[ISI][Medline]
  7. Linet MS, Hatch EE, Kleinerman RA, et al. Residential exposure to magnetic fields and acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children. N Engl J Med 1997;337:1–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Auvinen A, Linet MS, Hatch EE, et al. Extremely low-frequency magnetic fields and childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: an exploratory analysis of alternative exposure metrics. Am J Epidemiol 2000;152:20–31.[Abstract/Free Full Text]