..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Magda Havas Dredging Up Outdated Reports
On her web site, Magda Havas has taken to dredging up outdated reports on the subject of EMF and health. Many of the reports she has posted date from the late 60's or early 70's. Some of these "reports" are merely cursory descriptions of "studies" that were done in the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe in that time period. These "reports" have languished in well deserved obscurity for decades until they were dredged up by Havas and other alarmists. Here we will critique one of the "reports". The original can be found on Havas' web site: "Clinical and Hygienic Aspects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: A Review of Soviet and Eastern European Literature". Havas states that the author, Christophe Dodge, was "affiliated" with the Library of Congress. No other information is provided on the qualifications of the author nor on the reaction of the scientists who attended the Symposium where this report was presented.
The author describes this report as a summary of research studies published in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe on the subject of EMF and health in the 50's and 60's.
The author himself makes a number of statements that call into question the quality of the studies in the report.
P141
"An often disappointing facet of the Soviet and East European literature on the subject of clinical manifestations of microwave exposure is the lack of pertinent data on the circumstances and irradiation; frequency, effective area of irradiation, …exposure schedule and duration,…."
P141
"Unfortunately, it is often difficult to attach any significance to Soviet clinical findings in the absence of pertinent data on exposures and on patient backgrounds"
P142
"As can be seen from Table 4 the group exposed to the weakest radiation was shown to display the highest incidence of complaints. This finding and lack of pertinent exposure data such as duration and affected body area make these data difficult to accept on face value."
P143
"In general, because of the rather primitive state-of-the-art of EEG analysis, these finding should be viewed with extreme caution."
P144
"In the realm of parapsychology, it is interesting to note that the leading Soviet researchers who strongly believe in the nonthermal CNS effects of microwaves are involved in the electromagnetic (centimeter wave) theory of extrasensory perception"
The statement that "leading Soviet researchers" believe in the pseudoscience of parapsychology is quite revealing.
With statements such as the above sprinkled throughout this report, the author himself recognizes that many of the cited studies are flawed. In his conclusions, the author notes that the "Soviet and East European findings in this area are in striking contrast to those in the West". However he states that "Although the majority of Soviet finding on human responses to low intensity microwave fields must be regarded with extreme caution because of the omission of exposure and other pertinent data, it is suggested that the surprising consistency of this large body of findings merits the critical attention of the US scientific community.
One particularly giant flaw in these studies that the author fails to mention is: were these studies well designed using a double blind protocol? The double blind protocol is considered the scientific gold standard, particularly when evaluating subjective symptoms. In double blind EMF studies, both real and sham radiation is used. At the time each test is conducted, neither the subject nor the evaluator knows whether real of sham radiation is present. It is only after all the experiments are over that another scientist independently compiles the data. The words "double blind" do not appear anywhere in this report. Many of the studies cited in the report deal with subjective symptoms that are very similar to so called electrohypersensitivity or EHS. As our web site makes clear, dozens of double blind studies have failed to find any link between exposure to EMF and EHS symptoms. None of the other harmful effects of EMF cited in this report have been reproduced in subsequent properly conducted studies.
This report was published in 1969. The author suggests that these findings are worthy of "the critical attention of the US scientific community". In its 2004 document entitled "What are Electromagnetic Fields: Health Effects" the World Health Organization said: "In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields".
On her web site, Magda Havas has taken to dredging up outdated reports on the subject of EMF and health. Many of the reports she has posted date from the late 60's or early 70's. Some of these "reports" are merely cursory descriptions of "studies" that were done in the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe in that time period. These "reports" have languished in well deserved obscurity for decades until they were dredged up by Havas and other alarmists. Here we will critique one of the "reports". The original can be found on Havas' web site: "Clinical and Hygienic Aspects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: A Review of Soviet and Eastern European Literature". Havas states that the author, Christophe Dodge, was "affiliated" with the Library of Congress. No other information is provided on the qualifications of the author nor on the reaction of the scientists who attended the Symposium where this report was presented.
The author describes this report as a summary of research studies published in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe on the subject of EMF and health in the 50's and 60's.
The author himself makes a number of statements that call into question the quality of the studies in the report.
P141
"An often disappointing facet of the Soviet and East European literature on the subject of clinical manifestations of microwave exposure is the lack of pertinent data on the circumstances and irradiation; frequency, effective area of irradiation, …exposure schedule and duration,…."
P141
"Unfortunately, it is often difficult to attach any significance to Soviet clinical findings in the absence of pertinent data on exposures and on patient backgrounds"
P142
"As can be seen from Table 4 the group exposed to the weakest radiation was shown to display the highest incidence of complaints. This finding and lack of pertinent exposure data such as duration and affected body area make these data difficult to accept on face value."
P143
"In general, because of the rather primitive state-of-the-art of EEG analysis, these finding should be viewed with extreme caution."
P144
"In the realm of parapsychology, it is interesting to note that the leading Soviet researchers who strongly believe in the nonthermal CNS effects of microwaves are involved in the electromagnetic (centimeter wave) theory of extrasensory perception"
The statement that "leading Soviet researchers" believe in the pseudoscience of parapsychology is quite revealing.
With statements such as the above sprinkled throughout this report, the author himself recognizes that many of the cited studies are flawed. In his conclusions, the author notes that the "Soviet and East European findings in this area are in striking contrast to those in the West". However he states that "Although the majority of Soviet finding on human responses to low intensity microwave fields must be regarded with extreme caution because of the omission of exposure and other pertinent data, it is suggested that the surprising consistency of this large body of findings merits the critical attention of the US scientific community.
One particularly giant flaw in these studies that the author fails to mention is: were these studies well designed using a double blind protocol? The double blind protocol is considered the scientific gold standard, particularly when evaluating subjective symptoms. In double blind EMF studies, both real and sham radiation is used. At the time each test is conducted, neither the subject nor the evaluator knows whether real of sham radiation is present. It is only after all the experiments are over that another scientist independently compiles the data. The words "double blind" do not appear anywhere in this report. Many of the studies cited in the report deal with subjective symptoms that are very similar to so called electrohypersensitivity or EHS. As our web site makes clear, dozens of double blind studies have failed to find any link between exposure to EMF and EHS symptoms. None of the other harmful effects of EMF cited in this report have been reproduced in subsequent properly conducted studies.
This report was published in 1969. The author suggests that these findings are worthy of "the critical attention of the US scientific community". In its 2004 document entitled "What are Electromagnetic Fields: Health Effects" the World Health Organization said: "In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields".
Check out our page on EHS Product Scams
Except where noted all images on this web site are taken from the Wikipedia commons
All trademarks are the property of their respective owners Copyright 2009 EMF & Health
All trademarks are the property of their respective owners Copyright 2009 EMF & Health