6.3. SR 03-12-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

02/15/2001 10:14 FAX 612 241 1399 RIVERSIDE 002/003 CON'NEXUS ENERGY Memo Februal-y 13, 2001 Riverside Development Daryl Thompson From: Leo Ofrerman Reaardinu: EMF I know that the transmission lines have been brought up regarding the siting of the park area in your new development. I thought that the following might be of interest to you, Counterpoint: There is no conclusive evidence that power-line EMF harms health The Feb. :3 Counterpoint "Evidence suggests transmission lines indeed dangerous" misled readers by suggesting electric and magnetic fiek/s (EMF). specifically those from transmission lines, pose a health dsk EMF exists wherever electricity is present, whether near appliances or other household equipment, or near tran~mis,~Jon and distribution lines that transport electricity from power plants to hames and businesses, it is impossible to generate and use electrical energy without creating such fields: they are an inevitable consequence of our reliance on electricity. Alter more than 30 years of extensive mseamh on power lines and EMF, and a recent examination of that body of research by our count~/'s most prestigious govemment research organizations, them is no conclusive evidence that EMF exposure from power lines, even at high levels, causes adverse health effects. During the past five yams, more than 30 major epidemiological studies of power-frequency fields and cancer support this conciusJon. In June 1999, the National Research Council established a committee of scientists and engineers to review the activities conducted under the EMF-Research and Public Information Program. In its report, the council concluded that "the results of the EMF-RAPID program do not support the contention that the use of electricity poses a major unreco~,,nized public.health danger." The National Institutes ol Environmental Health Sciences in its June 1999 report states, '"The sdentffic evidence suggesting that EMF exposures pose any health dsk is weak." It further states, "Virtually all of the laboratory gvidence in animals and humans, and most of the mechani~c work done in cells, fails to support a causal relationship between exposure to EMF at environmental levels and changes in biological function or disease status." In January 2000, the Minnesota Department of Health completed an assessment of EMF health effects research. The department conducted this assessment because of public concems regarding the potential of EMF to cause cancer and other adverse health effects. The assessment included an evaluation of the peer-reviewed literature and the conclusions of the scientific committees convened by federal agencies and the U.S. Congress. The Heal/~ Department's assessment concluded that the current body of evidence does not show that