Betreff: Re: - ES Study..need "objective studies" not psycho opinions!!!
Datum: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:45:35 EDT
Robert: Psychology has its place but as you say, "bias" appears to be purposeful in this ES study..
One only has to watch testimony at a criminal trial to understand that game. The problem is, there is some truth in everything. As we know "money talks...."
I often wonder where the Hippocratic Oath comes into play in all of this. Not telling "the whole truth" translates into "deception -- outright lying!!!" To do no harm??? Toddlers are taught when they tell lies there are consequences. The problem is, no one is holding psychologists and psychiatrists to high enough standards and they are dealing with "subjective tests and subjective evaluations" for the most part and they are "being rewarded....." . Actually, "psychologists" do not take the Hippocratic Oath. In any event, "objective tests" are needed and even then, we are left to the mercy of interpretation by those influenced by funding.
You are right about honest persons such as like Dr Olle Johansson or Dr. Graham Blackwell.-- as the saying goes, "you can't find what you aren't looking for." We might add you can't find what you are looking for if you have predetermined the result based on payment for the service requested. I think you basically did say that.
Neither side should be attempting to prove or disprove ES/EHS based on pychological or behavioral reactions, in my opinion. There are just too many confounders.
Observations of animals removes some of the bias but then the results of those findings also hinge on personal observations swayed by life experiences including past studies, education, as well as common sense. When the observing scientist knows he or she won't be paid to do additional studies if conclusions are reached in opposition to the missions of the funders, there is no incentive to express honest opinions or to report honest conclusions.
It is my very strong belief that the issues re ES/EHS will never be properly evaluated until proper studies assessing adverse reactions vs. positive changes (documented "objective testing") that occur as result of very close exposures such as those that involve sleeping for many nights with electrical and/or telephone equipment close to a cage or bed.
Putting it that way, isn't that exactly what is happening already? Symptoms are being reported by parents -- "objective blood tests" prove there is toxic exposure......BUT, doctors do not know or claim to have no knowledge as to whether or not EMF's affect people as is known in the case of mice.
When a genetic link is not made, the immunologist states, "the problem has to be environmental...."
Are these infants reacting to nightly EMF toxic pollution because they were born to fear such exposure? Of course not!!! .Are the infants/toddlers diagnosed with rare immune deficiencies equating collapse of immune function and/or precancerous changes because their parents instilled/transferred some sort of fear to the affected child? That is absurd, of course......
Now I am going to veer off the subject of psychology (sort of).......
IF parents were provided with booklets when an infant leaves the hospital and doctors also explained importance of not having electrical items and phone equipment close to beds AND the media provided public service announcements cautioning everyone to provide distance between electrical items and telephone equipment particularly in sleeping areas, whether the bedroom or not, AND electrical and telephone items contained warning labels with instructions to use at a distance -- AND after all of this precautionary advice is given to the parents, they take the infant home to a crib with a monitor above, under, or in the crib, and/or place the crib against the wall opposite the electric or gas meter AND the child dies of unknown causes (SIDS) or the child lives only to be diagnosed with a rare immune deficiency said to be a precursor of Leukemia (or develops autism or other neurodegnerative disorders or other chronic illnesses), might not those parents be charged criminally?
The way I see it, an action such as placing an electrical or telephone item close to an infant's crib, or later, any child's bed, when it is common knowledge accompanied by many warnings, would constitute child abuse all the way to torture. In other words, not "just negligence" which is serious enough.
Scientist Roger Coghill knows this. He has even offered to pay electric company representatives to place their infant in a situation simulating sleeping close to an electric meter. Roger's challenge, called for exposure of 30 days only.
The £2000 ($3000) Coghill Challenge to power utility workers and the NRPB is:
Place any human infant of less than three months age to sleep each night for at least eight hours in an ELF electric field of 100 Volts per metre for thirty days. My studies predict that child will die, or become so seriously ill that the test will have to be called off. The NRPB and the power utilities' investigation levels by contrast predict there will be no adverse effect......
As was the case re my two grandsons as well as re my guinea pigs, "objective tests" -- blood tests that are the same results as those documented re monitoring exposure for X-ray workers as well as those undergoing radiation treatments for cancer, confirm the EMF exposure to an electric meter is, in fact, causing drastic blood changes (white blood cell changes/CBC's with differentials).
It is difficult, if not impossible, to argue the above facts are misleading or inconclusive and therefor any opinion based on evaluation of "subjective observations" would be laughable if not such an extremely serious matter.
As Assoc. Prof. Olle Johansson has agreed, it will be the blood results that correlate with what the Japanese and Russians have documented, written up in medical journals (many studies yet not translated) and that also correlate with known facts re blood changes due to radiation exposure, including documented facts re my grandsons and others (my guinea pigs' blood changes correlate with guinea pig studies conducted by Dr. Andrew Marino at Louisiana State University as well as cows in the Minnesota Herd Study), that finally open-the-door to providing meaningful, compassionate care to those suffering from symptoms of ES/EHS -- that I prefer to call "EMF/EMR-related toxicity."
I can add that persons dealing with family members who are suffering from EMF/EMR-related toxic health problems as well as the victim herself or himself, may very well need the services of a psychologist or psychologist considering the difficulties faced when trying to get help and survive in a world where "no one cares....." I do not think psychologists or psychiatrists will be in a position to prove cause and effect re EMF/EMR exposures regardless of the circumstances but that is "just me....!!!!" Take care - Joanne
Joanne C. Mueller
Guinea Pigs "R" Us
731 - 123rd Avenue N.W.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55448-2127 USA
Email: joanne@guineapigsrus ( 7-27-07 )
"Our frame of reference determines what we look at and how we look. And as a consequence, this determines what we find." Burke J, The Day the Universe Changed, 1985.