Latest News: archive of older items

HPA REPORT ON MELATONIN February 2006

The Health Protection Agency’s Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation have published a Report on melatonin. They look separately at:

• whether magnetic fields affect melatonin levels in people and conclude that there is no consistent or convincing evidence to indicate that EMFs can affect the production or action of melatonin
• whether melatonin can affect the risk of breast cancer, and concludes that the situation in humans is unclear.
• whether exposure to EMFs can affect the risk of breast cancer, and conclude that there is no consistent evidence for such an effect, nor has any mechanism for such a response been demonstrated.

See also:

• The full report
• The HPA press release

STUDY OF EMFs AND SURVIVAL FROM LEUKAEMIA January 2006

Most previous studies on magnetic fields and childhood leukaemia have looked at whether the fields cause the disease. A new study is the first to look at whether the fields affect survival from the disease.

• More detail on this study

HPA REPORT ON ELECTRICAL SENSITIVITY NOVEMBER 2005

 HPA have published a new report written for them by an outside expert, Dr Neil Irvine. This report concentrates on describing the symptoms that are reported by electrosensitive people, rather than trying to decide whether these symptoms are caused by EMFs or not.

More details

MORE INFORMATION ON SOURCES OF FIELDS JULY 2005

HPA-RPD have been investigating the sources of the fields in homes with high fields, greater than 0.4 µT. They have found that 43% come from high-voltage overhead power lines, with the rest coming from low-voltage wiring both inside and outside the home.

More detail on this study

PUBLICATION OF CCRG STUDY June 2005

The CCRG epidemiological study of childhood cancer and proximity to power lines in the UK published its first results in the British Medical Journal in June 2005.
The study looked at roughly 30,000 cases of childhood cancer from 1962 to 1995 in England and Wales and calculated the distance of the birth address to the nearest high-voltage power line.
It found “While few children in England and Wales live close to high voltage power lines at birth, there is a slight tendency for the birth addresses of children with leukaemia to be closer to these lines than those of matched controls.”
more detail on this study.

For the electricity industry response to this study click  here [link no longer working November 2011]
For responses by other organisations click here

NRPB BECOME PART OF HPA April 2005

On 1 April 2005, the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) became part of the Health Protection Agency (HPA). They are now the Radiation Protection Division of HPA, part of the Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards.

MEDIA REPORTS OF CHILDHOOD CANCER AND POWERLINES October 2004

In October (and also previously in September), the UK media carried reports that a study of childhood cancer and power lines in the UK had found an excess of cases close to lines.

The study concerned is an epidemiological study being conducted by the Childhood Cancer Research Group at the University of Oxford. Roughly 30,000 cases from 1963 to 1995 have been compared with matched controls and the distance to the nearest National Grid (275 kV and 400 kV) overhead power line calculated by National Grid Transco.

The study has been submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. Until it is published, it is not appropriate to comment on the claimed results, and it is not possible to assess the methodology or what the various possible interpretations of any result might be.
Update: the study was published in June 2005. See separate news item above.

WHO PRECAUTIONARY FRAMEWORK

The WHO have posted on their web site the latest version of their Precautionary Framework, which has two case studies applying the Framework to power-frequency and radio-frequency EMFs.

The Framework says that decisions about what precautionary actions to take should be based on a cost-benefit analysis, but one that takes account of social and ethical factors. Applied to power-frequency EMFs, WHO say that

“Under the WHO Precautionary Framework, [childhood leukaemia] warrants a thorough consideration of precautionary measures including detailed cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analyses”

and

“…even after fully allowing for the legitimate desire by society to err on the safe side, it seems likely that only very low-cost measures will be justified.”

The Government’s formal response to the NRPB’s recommendation in March 2004 that the UK adopt the ICNIRP exposure guidelines has now been published on the  Department of Health’s web site.

The Government state:

“.. the Government expects the NRPB guidelines to be implemented in line with the terms of the EU Recommendation, that is, taking account of the risks and benefits of action. Preliminary discussions have already taken place to identify what reasonable actions might be taken.”

On precautionary measures, they state:

“The Government will be exploring further the practical applications of precautionary measures within a stakeholder engagement process. This will be the subject of wide consultation and will explore any risks and benefits arising in the same manner as a Regulatory Impact Assessment.”

On March 31 2004 the NRPB published new advice on levels of exposure. They recommend that the international levels set by ICNIRP be adopted in the UK. These are the same as the present NRPB levels for occupational exposure, but lower for the public, by a factor of 5 at power frequencies, based on a more cautious interpretation of the science.

This is advice to Government, and Government will now have to decide if and how to implement it.

The ICNIRP guidelines, like the NRPB guidelines, set restrictions on exposure to prevent adverse health effects for which there is clear evidence and whose mechanisms are understood. The NRPB note that uncertainties in the science remain, particularly those associated with epidemiological studies. Although these studies do not provide a sound basis for quantifying exposure guidelines, the NRPB consider they indicate that further precaution may be appropriate in respect of some EMF exposures.

For more detail, see:
 The NRPB advice on exposure levels
 The accompanying review of the science by NRPB
 The NRPB's response to the comments they received during their consultation exercise
More detail on exposure limits in this and other countries.

NRPB REPORT ON PARTICLE DEPOSITION IN THE VICINITY OF POWER LINES (March 2004)

In March 2004 the NRPB’s Advisory Group (AGNIR) published a report into the suggested mechanisms whereby power lines might have an effect on airborne particles. It concluded:

“…it seems unlikely that corona ions would have more than a small effect on the long-term health risks associated with particulate air pollutants, even in the individuals who are most affected. In public health terms, the proportionate impact will be even lower because only a small fraction of the general population live or work close to sources of corona ions.”

and

“Any health risks from the deposition of environmental particulate air pollutants on the skin appear to be negligible.”

See also:
The complete report on the NRPB web site
Key extracts from the summary and conclusions
A response to the report from Bristol University (link no longer available 2008)
More information on the background to these the theories and other statements about them

DEMONSTRATIONS OF FLUORESCENT TUBES UNDER POWER LINES

The Artist in Residence at Bristol University Physics Department, Richard Box, has beautifully demonstrated how fluorescent tubes can glow under a power line. This is an effect of the electric field produced by the power lines, but the current required to produce a visible glow from a fluorescent tube is very low, and besides demonstrating rather elegantly the presence of the field, this phenomenon has no known implications for human health.

More on why fluorescent tubes light under power lines

DEVELOPMENTS ON THE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE ON EMFS

The European Union are developing a Directive on occupational exposure to EMFs. For more details see exposure limits.

In December 2003 the Commission and Council reached a Common Position which they passed to the Parliament’s Employment and Social Affairs Committee. That Committee will debate it and then pass it to the full Parliament. The Committee appointed Senor Alvarez as Rapporteur. He has produced a report including some proposed amendments. Other MEPs have also tabled amendments.

On March 18 2004 the Committee adopted five of the amendments and rejected the rest. On March 30 the full Parliament accepted the same five amendments.

The Common Position is very close to the ICNIRP exposure guidelines. The main effect of the proposed amendment would be to extend to requirements for health surveillance.

RESPONSES TO THE NRPB CONSULTATION ON EXPOSURE GUIDELINES July 2003

The NRPB public consultation on exposure guidelines closed on 28 July. As far as we are aware, NRPB has not released any of the responses it received nor stated how many.

Update: in July 2004 the NRPB published a Report discussing the responses it received, available here. (link no longer available 2008)

The UK Electricity Industry response is available here (no longer available}.

We have also compiled links (no longer available) to all the other responses we are aware of that are available on the internet. We will add any others that we may have missed if you would like to bring them to our attention.

NRPB/BRUNEL UNIVERSITY PAPER ON MAGNETIC FIELDS AND CHROMOSOME DAMAGE June 2003

On 11 June 2003, the British Journal of Cancer published research by scientists at the National Radiological Protection Board and Brunel Institute for Bioengineering.

The research looked for chromosome damage at magnetic fields up to 700 µT, and found none. Nor was there any change in the natural DNA repair mechanisms that would come in to play after such damage.

This finding reinforces the generally accepted position is that whilst there are some suggestions from epidemiology that magnetic fields are linked with childhood leukaemia, there is little support from biology. It looked at only one particular possible effect of magnetic fields, and clearly therefore cannot on its own rule out other possibilities.

The research was funded by the EMF Biological Research Trust. The Trust receives funding from National Grid, but is independent from industry. It decides which projects to support through a Scientific Advisory Committee chaired by Professor Mike Crumpton FRS, on which industry has no say whatsoever. The only request National Grid makes in exchange for its funding is that all studies undertaken should be openly published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, as this study has been.

The study reference is

P Hone, A Edwards, J Halls, R Cox and D Lloyd. Possible associations between ELF electromagnetic fields, DNA damage response processes and childhood leukaemia. British Journal of Cancer, volume 88 number 12, pp 1939-1941 2003.

It is available on the British Journal of Cancer web site (link no longer available July 2009)

Press releases about the study have been issued by NRPB and Cancer Research UK (link no longer available 2008)

On this site, see also more on the scientific evidence on childhood leukaemia, the different types of research that are performed and the relation between them, and the EMF Biological Research Trust.

NRPB PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON EXPOSURE GUIDELINES May 2003

On 1 May 2003 NRPB published a consultation document “Proposals for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (0-300 GHz)” on its web site. It invites comments from the public with the consultation period running till 28 July. The NRPB embarked on this review of its current exposure guidelines, which date from 1993, in 2002. The terms of reference of the review can be found in Hansard. It conducted a consultation with selected recognised experts in Autumn 2002 and held a public meeting in December 2002.

The NRPB's role is to provide scientific advice to Government. It will be for Government to receive the revised NRPB guidance following the consultation and decide what action to take (e.g., whether and how to implement it).

The document proposes the adoption of the ICNIRP exposure guidelines. For power frequencies, these differ from the present NRPB guidelines principally in that the levels for the general public are a factor of 5 lower than the present levels for occupational exposure (which are unchanged). The document includes detailed reviews of the scientific evidence on EMFs. It also recommends a discussion undertaken collectively by all stakeholders on the applicability of the Precautionary Principle to EMFs, to contribute to advice to government.

For more information see:
The consultation document on the NRPB’s web site (no longer available 2006)
On this web site, more information on exposure limits and the NRPB’s various statements on EMFs

DRAFT EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE ON OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO EMFs (DECEMBER 2002)

In December 2002 the European Commission issued the draft text of a proposed Directive. This Directive would be the third in a series of Physical Agents Directives (following Vibrations and Noise) and would apply to occupational exposure to EMFs.

The draft text is based round the ICNIRP exposure guidelines. It proposes Limit Values equal to the ICNIRP basic restrictions (10 mA m^-2 at power frequency) and Action Values equal to the ICNIRP reference levels (500 µT and 10 kV m^-2). However, it proposes more onerous actions at these levels than ICNIRP requires.

In the UK, the Health and Safety Executive have started consulting about the likely impact of this draft proposal.
For more information, see:
The exposure limits and guidelines section of this web site
The part of the HSE web site dealing with EMFs

NRPB PUBLIC MEETING (DECEMBER 5 2002)

On December 5 2002, the NRPB held a public meeting on powerlines and health at the NEC, Birmingham. Members of a panel drawn from the NRPB, its Advisory Groups and the WHO answered questions from an audience of over a hundred.

In the afternoon, some of the UK Interest Groups organised a follow-on meeting. One of the presentations given at that meeting is available on the web: by Professor O’Carrol.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES REPORT May 2002

The California Department of Health Services EMF project has produced various draft Risk Evaluations on EMFs; the final version was produced in May 2002.
The review was conducted by three scientists employed by the Department. Their conclusions were:

“To one degree or another all three of the DHS scientists are inclined to believe that EMFs can cause some degree of increased risk of childhood leukemia, adult brain cancer, Lou Gehrig’s Disease, and miscarriage.

They strongly believe that EMFs do not increase the risk of birth defects, or low birth weight.

They strongly believe that EMFs are not universal carcinogens, since there are a number of cancer types that are not associated with EMF exposure.

To one degree or another they are inclined to believe that EMFs do not cause an increased risk of breast cancer, hearth disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, Depression, or symptoms attributed by some to a sensitivity to EMFs. However,

All three scientists had judgments that were close to the dividing line between believing and not believing that EMFs cause some degree of increased risk of suicide, or

For adult leukemia, two of the scientists were close to the dividing line between believing and not believing and one was prone to believe that EMFs cause some degree of increased risk.”

The conclusions reached in the draft document appear to be inconsistent with those reached by, for example, the NRPB Advisory Group and IARC. Serious criticisms of the draft report have been made by various eminent independent scientists as part of the process of public comment.
More on the California review and other reviews of the science

NRPB STATEMENT ON MISCARRIAGES APRIL 2002

A statement by the NRPB’s Advisory Group on “Magnetic fields and miscarriage”, April 2002 discusses two papers on magnetic fields and miscarriage from California. It concludes:

Conclusion
Neither study provides substantial evidence of increased risk of miscarriage attributable to exposure to above average magnetic fields and neither justifies regulatory action. It would be expensive and difficult to carry out further epidemiological investigation that would address the issue robustly and, in the absence of a plausible biological mechanism that would link such exposure to miscarriage, it is arguable whether it would be justifiable to support research of this type. If further study is required, it would be worth financing only if a large cohort of (say) 2000 women could both be interviewed and have measurements made of their exposures over a period of at least 24 hours less than 8 weeks after their last menstrual period and have repeat measurements made on at least two further occasions within the next 8 weeks to determine the consistency of the exposures throughout early pregnancy and their temporal relationship to miscarriage.

More on miscarriages and the NRPB’s other reviews on cancer and neurodegenerative disorders

NRPB ADVISORY GROUP REPORT ON NEURODEGENERATIVE DISORDERS (NOVEMBER 2001)
In November 2001 the NRPB’s Advisory Group published a further Report on electromagnetic fields and neurodegenerative disease. The conclusion was:

“There is no good ground for thinking that exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields can cause Parkinson’s disease and only very weak evidence to suggest it could cause Alzheimer’s disease. The evidence that people employed in electrical occupations have an increased risk of developing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is substantially stronger, but this could be because they run an increased risk of having an electric shock rather than any effect of long-term exposure to the fields per se.”

See more information on the NRPB and on neurodegenerative disorders

PLANNING DECISION IN LOGAN, AUSTRALIA (NOVEMBER 2001)

A recent decision relating to a city called Logan in Australia has attracted some publicity. A utility company, Energex, applied for permission to install some new equipment. Permission was initially refused, and the matter went to the Queensland Planning and Environment Court in November 2001. In fact, by the time of the hearing, Logan City Council and Energex had already reached agreement, and the Court simply endorsed that agreement. The agreement included some clauses stating that the magnetic field would not exceed 0.4 µT in certain specified locations in specified properties (the locations specified are some way back from the actual lines which run along the street). These conditions would, in fact, be met by the design of the installation originally proposed by Energex, without any alteration or modification.

Thus, this seems to be a case of pragmatic agreement reached between a company and a local authority. It does not seem to have been imposed on them by the Court or anyone else, it does not limit the maximum field produced by the equipment, and it does not seem to change the exposure limits which apply across Australia as a whole.
See exposure limits and guidelines

REPORT FROM CSTEE, EUROPEAN COMMISSION (OCTOBER 2001)

The most recent scientific opinion of the European Commission on EMFs was produced in October 2001 by CSTEE – the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment.full text

Their key conclusion on power frequencies was:

Combined analyses of the epidemiological studies on the association between exposure to ELF and childhood leukaemia have strengthened the evidence of an association. However, given some inconsistencies in exposure measurements and the absence of other criteria commonly used in assessing causality (particularly a plausible explanation of underlying biological mechanisms, (see above), the association does not meet adequate criteria for being considered casual. Thus the overall evidence for 50/60 Hz magnetic fields to produce childhood leukaemia must be regarded as being limited*(*).

more on developments in Europe and other reviews of the science

UK STUDY OF BRAIN CANCER IN POWER WORKERS (OCTOBER 2001)
A paper in the October 2001 issue of “Occupational and Environmental Medicine” (OEM) reports on an epidemiological study of brain cancer and occupational exposure to magnetic fields among electricity workers in the UK. The study was conducted on a database of 84,000 staff who worked at the former Central Electricity Generating Board in the late 1970s.

A previous analysis of brain cancer was published in 1997. The present analysis includes more cases and uses a new, state-of-the-art exposure assessment procedure. The analysis was conducted by the University of Birmingham Institute of Occupational Health, with the exposure assessment by National Grid.

The new research confirmed the 1997 study in finding no evidence of an association between brain cancer and exposure to magnetic fields. The paper concluded:

“There is no discernible excess risk of brain tumours as a consequence of occupational exposure to magnetic fields in United Kingdom electricity generation and transmission workers.”

The paper is accompanied by an OEM editorial which states:

“We may well be doing a disservice not to share the good news more energetically and widely - electric utility workers and other similar such workers do not seem to be at measurably increased risk of brain cancer”.

[Occupational exposure to magnetic fields in relation to mortality from brain tumours: updated and revised findings from a study of UK electricity generation and transmission workers. 1973-97; T Sorahan, L Nicholas, M van Tongeren, JM Harrington, Institute of Occupational Health, University of Birmingham. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2001;58:626-630 (October)]
more on research involving this cohort of workers
The paper is available (to subscribers or by one-off payment) from the Journal’s web site http://oem.bmjjournals.com/ and you can read the abstract here

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SCIENCES EVALUATION OF POSSIBLE RISKS FROM
EMFs (JULY 2001)
For more recent developments on this, see May 2002

In July 2001, California Department of Health Sciences released draft documents (labelled "do not cite or quote") on
EMF Risk Evaluation and Policy Options, for public comment. The draft Risk Evaluation classifies electric and magnetic fields and various diseases, using two different schemes: one, the same scheme used by IARC, and the other, a direct estimate of the likelihood that EMFs can cause various diseases. In both cases, the classification was made by three individual scientists who all work for the Department. Their conclusions suggested that EMFs were a possible (and even in some cases a probable) cause of increased risk for a number of health conditions, notably childhood and adult leukaemia, adult brain cancer, miscarriage and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. These conclusions are out of line with recent authoritative reviews of the science performed by the NRPB and IARC. There is now a process of public comment on the drafts.
This early draft has been superseded by the final version

The documents also contain details of two epidemiological studies, which appear to find a statistical association
between miscarriage and one particular measure of exposure, namely the peak level of exposure to magnetic fields.
However, there are a number of flaws with the studies, notably very low participation rates, and it is not possible to
draw any firm conclusions.

INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER CLASSIFICATION OF EMFS (JUNE 2001)
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is an agency of the World Health Organisation. The IARC Monographs’ series publishes authoritative independent assessments by international experts of the risks of cancer posed to humans by a variety of agents, mixtures and exposures. Since its inception in 1972, the series has reviewed more than 860 agents.

In June 2001, IARC convened a working group to examine the evidence and classify EMFs. The classification was made according to the scheme set by IARC, and relates to cancer only, not to any other diseases. According to this scheme, the evidence from humans (ie epidemiological studies) and from animals is first judged separately, and these two verdicts are then combined into an overall classification. For extremely-low-frequency ELECTRIC fields, IARC’s classification was “not classifiable” due to “inadequate” evidence in both humans and animals.

For extremely-low-frequency MAGNETIC fields, IARC’s classification was “possibly” a cause of cancer, based on “inadequate” evidence in animals, “inadequate” evidence in humans for most types of cancer, but “limited” evidence in humans for childhood leukaemia.
More on IARC including links to their web site and other reviews of the science

The NRPB issued a statement in response to the IARC working group stating that the findings were consistent with the AGNIR report of March 2001. They restated the AGNIR findings that:

“Laboratory experiments have provided no good evidence that extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields are capable of producing cancer, nor do epidemiological studies suggest that they cause cancer in general. There is , however, some epidemiological evidence that prolonged exposure to higher power frequency magnetic fields is associated with a small risk of leukaemia in children. In practice, such levels of exposure are seldom encountered by the general public in the UK. In the absence of clear evidence of a carcinogenic effect in adults or of a plausible explanation from experiments on animals or isolated cells, the epidemiological evidence is currently not strong enough to justify a firm conclusion that such fields cause leukaemia in children.”

UK STUDY OF LEUKAEMIA IN POWER WORKERS (MAY 2001)
In the late 1970s, a cohort (large sample) was set up of all the then staff of the Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB). This included around 84,000 people. This group is being monitored for cause of death and any association with magnetic fields.

A study of brain tumours, published in January 1997 in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine found no association with magnetic fields. The May 2001 issue of the same journal included a paper analysing deaths from leukaemia from the same sample of UK power workers.

The study looked for any association with exposure to magnetic fields, using a novel, state-of-the-art method for assessing magnetic-field exposure, developed by staff at National Grid.
The paper concludes:

“There are no discernible excess risks of leukaemia as a consequence of occupational exposure to magnetic fields in United Kingdom electricity generation and transmission workers.”

[Leukaemia mortality in relation to magnetic field exposure: findings from a study of United Kingdom electricity generation and transmission workers, 1973-97. J M Harrington, L Nichols, T Sorahan, M van Tongeren, Institute of Occupational Health, University of Birmingham. Occup Environ Med 2001;58:307-314 ( May )]
more on research on this cohort of workers including the full abstract

NRPB ADVISORY GROUP REPORT (MARCH 2001)
On 6 March 2001, the National Radiological Protection Board’s (NRPB) Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation (AGNIR) released a comprehensive report titled “ELF Electromagnetic Fields and the Risk of Cancer”. The report surveyed the evidence relating to electric and magnetic fields and cancer, concentrating on the studies published since 1992, the last time AGNIR published a major review of the literature.

The Advisory Group stated:
“for the vast majority of children in the UK there is now considerable evidence that the electromagnetic field levels to which they are exposed do not increase the risk of leukaemia or other malignant disease.”

However, they also noted:
“the possibility remains that intense and prolonged exposures to magnetic fields can increase the risk of leukaemia in children” but “the epidemiological evidence is currently not strong enough to justify a firm conclusion that such fields cause leukaemia in children.”

For adults, they noted:
“There is no reason to believe that residential exposure to electromagnetic fields is involved in the development of leukaemia or brain tumours in adults.”

On occupational exposure they said:
“causal relationships between such exposure and an increase in tumour incidence at any site
are not established.”

In response to this report, NRPB stated:
“The Board considers that the AGNIR report provides no additional scientific evidence to require a change in exposure guidelines.”

More on reviews of the science including this one For the contents and conclusions of this report, and NRPB press release and response statement click here

GERMAN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY OF MAGNETIC FIELDS AND CHILDHOOD LEUKAEMIA (MARCH 2001)
An epidemiological study of magnetic fields and childhood leukaemia was published in the International Journal of Cancer in March 2001. The study involved measurements of fields for 500 children with leukaemia across the whole of the former West Germany. This was a smaller study than the UK or USA studies, but still fairly large by EMFs study standards.

The study found a statistical association between fields and leukaemia. It found only a weak relation between 24-hour-average fields and cancer but a stronger relationship between night-time fields (a relative risk of 3.2, statistically significant).

These results are broadly consistent with the pooled analysis of magnetic fields and childhood leukaemia published in 2000, which also identified a statistical association between the highest exposures and leukaemia. The consideration of night-time exposures, however, is unique to this study.

Like all epidemiological studies, this study can only observe statistical associations, and cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships, ie that the observed cases of leukaemia were caused by magnetic fields. The authors concluded that:

“Our study provides evidence for a weak association between childhood leukaemia and exposure to residential power-frequency magnetic fields. An explanation for this association remains unclear.”

They also said that:
“although our study shows an association between childhood leukaemia and exposure to residential magnetic fields, it is neither a proof nor a breakthrough.”

More on this study and others of childhood leukaemia

UKCCS CHILDHOOD CANCER AND RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY TO POWER LINES (NOVEMBER 2000)
A paper entitled "Childhood cancer and residential proximity to power lines", by the UK Childhood Cancer Study (UKCCS) investigators, was published on 14 November 2000 in the British Journal of Cancer. This was the second major report of a series of EMFs related research studies being undertaken by the UKCCS investigators.

The study concluded that:
"There is no evidence that either proximity to electrical installations or the magnetic field levels they produce in the UK is associated with increased risk of childhood leukaemia or any other cancer."

This supported the conclusion of the first major EMFs related study by UKCCS published in The Lancet on 3 December 1999. Entitled "Exposure to power frequency magnetic fields and the risk of childhood cancer: a case-control study," the paper stated that:

"This study provides no evidence that exposure to magnetic fields associated with the electricity supply in the UK increases risks for childhood leukaemia, cancers of the nervous system, or any other childhood cancer."

This UKCCS paper superseded the results of the magnetic field study in relation to proximity to power lines. The previous data [included in the magnetic field study] "has on occasion been interpreted incorrectly as indicating the effects of proximity" stated this report.

The paper specifically concerned proximity to power lines and other electricity supply equipment. Because it was concerned with distances measured from maps with calculations and did not depend on any measurements, the study was able to include subjects which had to be excluded from the magnetic field study because they had no measurements. Thus, this study contained 3380 cases and 3390 controls compared with the 2226 used for the magnetic fields paper, representing a significantly larger number.

The paper examined power lines at all voltages from 6.6 kV to 400 kV, and a range of distances from the lines from 50 m to 400 m. None of the relative risks were found to be statistically significant and all were close to unity, indicating no association.

More on the UKCCS

POOLED ANALYSES OF CHILDHOOD LEUKAEMIA AND MAGNETIC FIELDS (2000)
During 2000, two pooled analyses studies of childhood leukaemia and magnetic fields were published. A pooled analysis study does not contain any new data. Instead, it combines data from previously published studies in order to provide a single statistical analysis.

The two studies differed slightly in their selections of previous work and in the way the data was analysed but reached similar conclusions.

Both found that statistically, there was no suggestion of an increased risk of childhood leukaemia at the magnetic field levels to which the majority of children are exposed. Although at the highest exposures (24-hour or longer average fields in homes of greater than 0.4 µT) there was a statistical finding of increased risk, one of the papers commented that "The explanation for the elevated risk is unknown." As these pooled analyses do not provide new data, and have only limited ability to correct for methodological flaws in the contributing studies, the same paper concluded that, "selection bias may have accounted for some of the increase."
More on the pooled analyses and other studies of childhood cancer

UK CHILDHOOD CANCER STUDY MAGNETIC FIELD RESULT (DECEMBER 1999)

For full details of all UKCCS EMF publications, see UKCCS

The first results from the United Kingdom Childhood Cancer Study have been published.
For over six years, a major epidemiological study of childhood cancer has been underway in the UK, known as the United Kingdom Childhood Cancer Study (UKCCS). It has been looking at a number of suggested causes of childhood cancer, including magnetic fields, and the magnetic-field result was the first to be published, on 3 December 1999 in the Lancet.

The main conclusion of the paper was:
“This study provides no evidence that exposure to magnetic fields associated with the electricity supply in the UK increases risks for childhood leukaemia, cancers of the central nervous system, or any other childhood cancer.”

The main hypothesis was that for leukaemia and/or central nervous system (CNS) tumours, risk would be elevated amongst children with exposure greater than 0.2 microteslas, compared to children with exposure of less than 0.1 microtesla. In fact, for both these diseases, the adjusted odds ratios were less than 1 (indicating no association of exposure and disease), being 0.90 for leukaemia and 0.46 for CNS tumours. The odds ratio for all cancers combined was 0.87, again less than 1.

Although it was the electricity industry that suggested to the researchers that they include magnetic fields in their study, and through the EA the industry has provided the necessary funding, the conduct of the study has been independent of the industry. The study is the largest of its kind ever to be performed in the UK, with every case of childhood leukaemia occurring in the UK over a four-year period eligible for inclusion. Its methodology, and in particular the exposure assessment, were state-of-the-art.

RESEARCH BY PROFESSOR HENSHAW AND DR PETER FEWS AT BRISTOL UNIVERSITY (DECEMBER 1999)
For a full discussion of this issue, see electric fields and ions

In 1996, Denis Henshaw, Professor of Physics at Bristol University, suggested that electric fields produced by the overhead transmission lines may affect radioactive radon "daughter products", and that this might be the link between EMF and disease. Subsequently, he made further suggestions that fields could affect other airborne particulates at a conference organised by the University of Bristol in September 1998.

When subjected to detailed scientific scrutiny, Professor Henshaw's were criticised on theoretical grounds by scientists at the UK National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB). Experimentally, two independent groups (Dr Miles from the NRPB and Dr McLaughlin from Dublin) looked for and failed to find some of the effects predicted by Professor Henshaw.

Further theories were put forward by Professor Henshaw on the increased deposition of charged particles on surfaces near to power lines in December 1999.

THE US NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES (NIEHS) DIRECTOR’S REPORT TO THE US CONGRESS (JUNE 1999)
For further information on this click here

As part of the conclusion of the USA Federal Government’s six year research programme on EMF, the Research and Public Information Dissemination Program (EMF-RAPID Program), the Director of the NIEHS issued a report to Congress in June 1999. While sections of the report say EMF exposure “cannot be recognised as entirely safe”, the report concluded:

“The NIEHS believes that the probability that EMF exposure is truly a health hazard is currently small. The weak epidemiological associations and lack of any laboratory support for these associations provide only marginal scientific support that exposure to this agent is causing any degree of harm.”

CANADIAN CHILDHOOD CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES (APRIL AND JUNE 1999)
During 1999, the results of two different epidemiological studies of EMF and childhood cancer in Canada were published. The first, and larger of the two, by Dr Mary McBride from the British Columbia Cancer Agency and others, was published in April, with the second and smaller, by Dr Lois Green from the University of Toronto and others, was published in June.

The McBride study found no suggestions of a link between cancer and either measured fields or “wire codes”. The Green study, which was half the size and which has been criticised on methodological grounds by some scientists, did find some statistical associations, though the lead author Lois Green herself said “...this study does not establish that magnetic fields cause cancer”.

More on studies of childhood cancer

THE US NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENT HEALTH SERVICES (NIEHS) WORKING GROUP REPORT (1998)
As part of the US Government’s EMF-RAPID programme, the National Institute of Environmental Health Services (NIEHS) set up a working group in 1998 to examine all the evidence relating to EMFs. They expressed their conclusions using the criteria of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC have five categories:

• The agent is carcinogenic
• The agent is probably carcinogenic
• The agent is possibly carcinogenic
• The agent is not classifiable
• The agent is probably not carcinogenic

No one on the working group voted for "is carcinogenic" or "probably carcinogenic". 19 members voted for "possibly carcinogenic", 9 for "not classifiable" and 1 for "probably not carcinogenic".
More on NIEHS and other reviews of the science

THE US NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE (NCI) STUDY (1997)
In July 1997, the results of an epidemiological study into EMF and childhood leukaemia, conducted by the NCI in the USA, were published ("Residential exposure to magnetic fields and acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children", Martha Linet et al, The New England Journal of Medicine Vol 337 no 1 pp1-7). The study authors' conclusion was:

"our results provide little evidence that living in homes characterised by high measured time-weighted average magnetic-field levels or by the highest wire-code category increases the risk of ALL (Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia) in children".

More on this study and others of childhood cancer