Re: E-M fields health risks

[brian whatcott <inet@INTELLISYS.NET>]

At 21:02 7/18/01 -0500, David Marx wrote:

> /// Luis Alverez published a study
> ... a graph showing the incidence per hundred
> thousand of cancers and it increased in a slowly increasing, nearly
> exponential manner from the year 1900.  He plotted on the same graph,
> the electricity production per hundred thousand people and it
> increased at a larger exponential rate over the same period.  Then,
> he removed the respiratory cancers from the earlier plot and found a
> nearly constant rate of non-respiratory cancers.

> From this, we
> conclude that although we have substantially increased our production
> of electricity over the past hundred years, we haven't increased the
> incidence of cancer.  Presumably, the increase in respiratory cancers
> is due to air pollution and smoking increases over that period.
>
> Take care,
> David Marx
> Southern Illinois University
> Carbondale, IL

I am not the one to knock Alvarez' methods or conclusions, but starting
 from a US life expectancy in 1900 of 48 years or so and noting its
 exponential rise by perhaps 50% in the interim to almost European
levels, am I to conclude that the correlated increase in electrical
supply over the same period indicates a therapeutic value to electrical
 and magnetic fields in the US?


brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>  Altus OK
                Eureka!