July/August 1997
Number 137

A Publication of The Bioelectromagnetics Society

IN THIS ISSUE...

CALL FOR CRITICAL DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC ISSUES
by Martin Blank
President, The Bioelectromagnetics Society

The recent publication of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) report on the EMF leukemia study in the New England Journal of Medicine, along with extensive and over-simplified press coverage, has been confusing and misleading. There is a great need to have an open and critical discussion of the scientific issues to help clarify these matters for our members and for the public. The New England Journal of Medicine is an unlikely forum for an open discussion having compromised their objectivity by publishing a one-sided editorial in the same issue as the paper. The Bioelectromagnetics Newsletter is an appropriate forum, and I invite letters from our members on this and related topics. Below is a Press Release from the World Congress on Breast Cancer to start this discussion.

Dateline: World Conference on Breast Cancer
Kingston, Ontario, Canada July 15, 1997
The recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine by Linet and colleagues has been widely reported as showing no link between exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) and one type of leukemia in children. On the basis of this new study, some scientists and some news media organizations, including the major networks, have repeated the questionable claim that the link between EMF exposure and cancer risk is no longer an issue, and further research is unnecessary.

Such statements, based on a single study, are troubling. More disturbing still, is the fact that the data presented in the Linet, et al., study do not support the assertion that no link exists. Even a cursory review of the main data set shows a 53% increase in leukemia incidence at magnetic field exposure levels above 2 mG, a 72% increase (which is statistically significant) above 3 mG, and a more than 600% increase at exposures of between 4 and 5 mG. Above 5 mG, no link is shown, but there are too few cases in this range to yield any significant result.Dr. Bary Wilson, who has co-authored a recent book on EMF and breast cancer, and several other speakers at the World Conference on Breast Cancer, including Dr. Kjell Hansson Mild of the National Institute of Working Life in Sweden, have stated that a study which is apparently positive and limited only to leukemia should not be used to discount a possible link between EMF and cancer in its entirety.

Any statement claiming the demise of the EMF and cancer issue should be based on an analysis of all the available data and not one study, particularly one in which the reported data are apparently not reflected in the conclusions. In fact available data on the subject, provided by many scientists over more than a decade, do not support the hypothesis that there is no link between EMF exposure and increased risk for several types of cancer.

Cindy Sage of Sage Associates and Chair of the EMF program at the conference points out that , "even a small increased risk of breast cancer due to EMF exposure has enormous public health implications given the high incidence of this disease in developed countries."

Based on the Linet, et al., study, it is clearly not justified to call for the end of research into the possible link between EMF and breast cancer, in particular, cessation of research funding at this time would be reckless and scientifically indefensible.

Kjell Hansson Mild, Ph.D.
National Institute for Working Life, Sweden

Bary W. Wilson, Ph.D.
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, USA

Cindy Sage
Sage Associates, USA

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

SABBATICAL AT WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IN GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
by Ben Greenebaum

I am fast approaching the midpoint of a sabbatical year with the World Health Organization's (WHO) International EMF Project in Geneva, Switzerland. My e-mail indicates that "How's Geneva?", "How's the WHO?", and "What are you doing?" are pretty common questions. Here is at least a partial answer to those questions. Mike Repacholi, head of the International EMF Project, has a more serious presentation on the Project itself, elsewhere in this Newsletter.

When I knew in spring, 1996, that I was likely to get a sabbatical in 1997-98, I wrote a number of people, as well as a few funding applications, looking for interesting things to do and the money to do it with. I was all set with a project closer to home--which I still want to work on later in 1998--when I got an e-mail from Mike in early April, 1997: Could I start May 1? Since I had to give and grade an exam on May 15, that was sort of tough. But Nancy and I somehow arranged our affairs, figured out how to edit Bioelectromagnetics using e-mail and airmail, closed up the house and got on a plane on May 30.

Things started fast. We arrived in Geneva on a Sunday afternoon, had rest two hours at the hotel, and got taken to dinner at Mike's house with a few people from the Project's Steering Committee, which was meeting the next day. I jet-lagged my way through two days of meetings with people from 40 countries, and then we got on the train for the WHO review of ELF research in Bologna that preceded the World Congress. Aided by an accident on the Italian rail line that got us to bed at 3 am, I jet-lagged through that, too. After ten days in Bologna, we got back to Geneva in mid-June and started to live a more normal expatriate life.

We spent a week in a residential hotel in nearby France, where the cost of most things is noticeably cheaper and many of the WHO staff live. But then we sublet a rather nice apartment in the Champel neighborhood of Geneva itself and settled into a less isolated life. Our place is large, has 2 bedrooms we can use (one's locked for storage), so we have room for visiting family and friends. Geneva is one of the more costly cities in the world, but the flat happens still to be rent-controlled (New Yorkers have a similar system), so we're paying no more than a reasonable rent for a similar place in Manhattan, Back-Bay Boston, or Chicago. Kitchen is small with the usual European under-the-counter refrigerator. Food and wine, of course, are quite good. Nice open-air markets, both Swiss and French. Restaurants in both countries are also good, but my definition of "low-cost" for a decent meal has increased, particularly in Switzerland.

The neighborhood is middle-class residential. It used to be full of lovely, 10-room houses that have mostly been replaced by rectangular 9-floor apartment blocks, but there are still many trees and lawns and neighborhood shopping areas. All stores close at 6:45 pm, and the only way to buy bread at night or on Sunday is to go to France or the rail station. But the bus system is spectacular. I have a choice of the line across our street or the one that goes to WHO without a transfer that's about a half-mile walk through a nice park. If I miss one, I have to wait 5-6 minutes. Good place to do my editorial reading or sit with the Geneva newspaper in one hand and my French-English dictionary in the other.

Geneva and environs are definitely French. WHO runs mostly in English, except for the lunchroom and janitorial crew. In town, most of the professional people and those in the downtown shops speak English. The neighborhood shops, the gas station (the one commodity that's cheaper in Switzerland than in France), etc., are strictly French-speaking. Nancy is getting quite facile with her college French. I'm doing better, but my German courses only help when we're touring.

We do have a car that Mike Repacholi is kindly renting us, which is great for weekends. We've been on a large fraction of the back roads within a day's drive of Geneva, taken a long weekend in Italy and shorter ones in Switzerland, and so on. We also took a week to see a former exchange student "daughter" get married in Paris and then toured Brittany. More trips planned, of course.

The International EMF Project at WHO is a three-person shop--Repacholi, a secretary, and me. We get help from others in our division inside WHO and from a great number of people and organizations around the world, including many members of BEMS, who participate in our meetings and comment and supply materials for our draft documents. My role is basically to draft, edit, incorporate comments, and otherwise massage the reports the Project issues on the state of ELF research (Bologna meeting), risk perception, and why the public and the experts see things differently (Vienna meeting last month), and some booklets intended for non-specialists in government offices and the public. For me, it has been an interesting shift in perspective to go from the lab research to the policy perspective. In the lab--or in the journal--I am used to asking, "What's going on here? And why?" Now it is, "What do we really know? What are its known implications for human health and well-being? Is there enough to cross the threshold of advising mandatory or voluntary precautions? What is it important for us to find out next? And, how can we relate what we know and what we don't know to clarify some limits on the uncertainties imposed by still-unanswered questions?"

WHO is an interesting organization for an outsider to try to figure out. It is a large, rather bureaucratic place, like any big governmental agency. It is an independent UN agency, but it seems to have the problems of the rest of the UN. Budgets are tight, and the staff has shrunk over the years. The program has also shrunk, but less, creating the obvious problems. Jesse Helms is a curse word around here, and people marvel at both the seniority system of the US Senate and US foreign policy in general. But other countries also have concerns about how the UN, including WHO, has been run, and have held up contributions (but not necessarily attempts to appoint their citizens to WHO, some of whom are competent). Budget cuts mean that there are few permanent program positions, mostly held by very senior people. Surprisingly many people are on short-term appointments, even those who have been here for years. Many programs, including the EMF Project, raise their own funds, rather than using general budget. Unfortunately, the top brass seems not to have contracted proportionately. Since the present head of WHO is retiring, the staff has hope for improvements.

It's been an interesting time. While I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, I would for many. I'd be glad to comment further via e-mail. Or drop by if you're in the neighborhood.

Ben Greenebaum
EHG/EHR
WHO
1211 Geneva 27
Switzerland
E-mail: greenebaumb@who.ch
Tel. : +41-22-791-3869 (with voice mail)
Fax: +41-22-791-4123

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

A symposium to honor Dr. Carl Durney upon his retirement is to be held at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, on October 20-21, 1997. Durney retired from the Electrical engineering faculty June 30, 1997 after more than 34 years of very distinguished service to the University of Utah. To recognize the many pioneering contributions that Durney made to the dosimetry of electromagnetic fields for models of the human body and animals, the symposium is to focus on the quarter century of progress in the field that he has greatly influenced. As we may recall, Carl Durney was the principal author of the four editions of the Radio Frequency Radiation Dosimetry handbooks, Volumes 1-4 published during the years 1976-1986. Many of Durney’s peers and former students in bioelectromagnetics have agreed to speak at the symposium with a concluding talk from Dr. Durney titled "25 Years of Dosimetry: What Now" on October 21.

The symposium is supported by the USAF Armstrong Laboratory Radio Frequency Division, that supported Durney’s research and led to the publication of the aforementioned dosimetry handbooks. Durney served as the third President of The Bioelectromagnetics Society during the years 1981-82. Also attending the symposium will be several past presidents of The Bioelectromagnetics Society including Drs. Arthur W. Guy, Don R. Justesen, Maria Stuchly, Om Gandhi and James Lin.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

The d'Arsonval Award is presented by the Society to recognize the extraordinary accomplishment within the discipline of bioelectromagnetics. Nominations are now being solicited for a seventh Award in 1998. Previous d'Arsonval Award winners include: Dr. O. P. Gandhi (1995), University of Utah; Dr. C. H. Durney (1993), University of Utah; Dr. C. A. L. Bassett (1991), Dr. W. Ross Adey (1989), University of California at Riverside; Dr. Arthur W. Guy (1987), University of Washington; and Dr. Herman P. Schwan (1985), University of Pennsylvania.

The procedure for administering the Award is described below. Briefly, a Full, Charter or Emeritus Member of the Society may nominate any person on the basis of their extraordinary accomplishments in bioelectromagnetics. Membership in the Society is not a prerequisite for nomination. Letters of nomination should present the reasons and justification for the nomination and a complete Curriculum Vitae with publications must accompany the nomination. More than one Society member may nominate or endorse the same individual. However, only one Vitae is required. The Society's Nominating Committee may also nominate individuals for the Award. Nominations in proper order are retained and reconsidered for five years, those that do not meet these guidelines will not be considered or retained. Nominations will be considered by the Awards Committee and all letters and supporting documents together with the recommendations of the Awards Committee will be presented to the Board of Directors at the Winter Board Meeting. To ensure time for consideration by the Awards Committee, all nominations and supporting materials must reach the Chairman of the Awards Committee by December 6, 1997.

All nominations and correspondence about the Award should be addressed to the Awards Chairman: Dr. Craig V. Byus, Division of Biomedical Sciences, University of California at Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521 (Tel: 909-787-4535; Fax: 909-787-5504; E-mail: craig.byus@ucr.edu).

Description: The purpose of the d'Arsonval Medal is to recognize outstanding achievement in bioelectromagnetics. The Award, which consists of a silver medal, an illuminated testimonial, and a $1,000 honorarium, is presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society. The Award shall be given from time to time at the discretion of the Board of Directors, but no more than one Award shall be given in any one year.

Eligibility: The sole requirement is extraordinary accomplishment within the discipline of bioelectromagnetics, which can consist of exceptional scientific accomplishments or practical application of electromagnetic fields for human benefit. Membership in the Society is not a requirement.

Criteria and Procedure for Selection of Candidates: The Awards Committee will administer the Award. Six members will be appointed by the President with the approval of the Board of Directors. Each member will serve a three-year term on a rotating basis. Three members each will represent engineering and physical sciences, and experimental biology and medicine. A seventh member, a Chairman, will be selected from the Board of Directors during his/her first year of membership on the Board for a term of three years. Previous Award winners shall be included on the Awards Committee for a period of five years after receiving the Award. The Committee shall consider those individuals properly nominated during the previous five years and current nominations. The Chairman will be a nonvoting member except in the case of a tie vote.

a. Selection of a Recipient: Notice of the Award shall be published in the Bioelectromagnetics Newsletter and Full, Charter or Emeritus Members are invited to submit names and supporting information to the Chairman of the Awards Committee. The Committee shall evaluate the credentials of the individual proposed. Once one or more candidates have been considered qualified for the Award, the Chairman will transmit in confidence a written recommendation with supporting information to the Board. The Board, in turn, may reject or accept any or all candidates during any calendar year. Acceptance of any candidate will require a two-thirds majority vote by the Board, with a quorum present and the Chair of the Awards Committee ineligible to vote. The Board may, if requested, authorize travel support to help cover the cost of the attendance of the nominee to the Annual Meeting.

b. Restrictions: No member of the Board of Directors or the Awards Committee shall be considered a nominee for this Award during his/her membership on the Board or Committee.

c. Timing: Decisions regarding the d'Arsonval medal shall be made by the Board during the Winter Board meeting before the Annual Meeting at which the Award is to be presented. Immediately after the decision, the Chairman of the Awards Committee shall notify the candidate(s), ensure his/her attendance at the Annual Meeting, and request that the candidate present a lecture at the Annual Meeting. The name of the candidate and the title of the lecture shall be published in the program for the meeting.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

BIOELECTROCHEMISTRY (BES) GORDON CONFERENCES
by Martin Blank
Columbia University, New York, New York, USA

(The following article was submitted to the Gordon Conference in response to a request for information about the Bioelectrochemistry Gordon Conferences, the first of which was organized by Dr. Blank in 1980.)

In June 1997, the Second World Congress on Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine was held in Bologna, Italy. This meeting, sponsored by four international societies, with the participation of five other groups, having the diverse interests represented by the title, was initially catalyzed and took shape at several Bioelectrochemistry Gordon Conferences. At the Gordon Conferences the scientific atmosphere of open discussion enabled people from different groups to meet in a neutral environment (without society politics) and to become aware of the common interests that have become the foci of the two World Congresses (1992, 1997). It should come as no surprise that the bringing together of scientists, with different views on related problems, was my motivation in applying for approval of a Bioelectrochemistry Gordon Conference. However, it may be of interest to see how my ideas of the need for a Gordon Conference in this area developed.

My Perspective on Research
As I look back, I see that my application to the Gordon Research Conference was largely the result of two important experiences: two years (1957-59) of independent research in the interdisciplinary Colloid Science Laboratory in Cambridge University, and a year (1974-75) of scientific reporting on interdisciplinary research for the US Office of Naval Research (ONR) in London.

After earning a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from Columbia University, I spent two years at the Colloid Science Laboratory. There, the focus was on parallel problems of surfaces controlling the properties of phases and membranes controlling the properties of cells, and I was impressed how the interdisciplinary approach elucidated both problems. I have continued to study passive and active ion transport in cells and how they are mediated by channel processes that are controlled by surface charge. My early studies on permeability of thin films showed the importance of surface charge in controlling ion flow, and I later demonstrated that the same property controlled protein aggregation. It was therefore possible to show how slight changes in charge cause the protein channels to open or close, and simultaneously affect ion flow. This model can describe excitation and active ion transport, and I am now studying effects of electromagnetic fields on enzymes to explain how the fields interact with mobile charges involved in function.

While exposure to the atmosphere at Cambridge had a strong influence on my research, it was after the year at ONR-London that I became convinced that interdisciplinary research could contribute to scientific progress in general. I wrote a report on the subject that was well received and reprinted in the 50th anniversary volume of ONR-London. I soon decided that I would have to do more than write. I decided to assume leadership roles that have included terms as Chairman of the Organic and Biological Division of the Electrochemical Society, President of the Bioelectrochemical Society, and I am now the President of The Bioelectromagnetics Society.

Over the years I have organized many interdisciplinary symposia for the American Chemical, Electrochemical, Bioelectrochemical and Bioelectromagnetics Societies. The larger meetings I organized started with the Fourth International Symposium on Bioelectrochemistry (1976). I then started the first Gordon Research Conference on Bioelectrochemistry (1980) and later (1981-1991) organized four interdisciplinary courses at the Majorana Center, Erice, Italy. At the Gordon on bioelectrochemistry we started talks about organizing a World Congress and I worked on the Executive Committees of both the First (1992) and Second (1997) World Congress on Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine. I have also used my service on editorial boards of several journals, including Journal of the Electrochemical Society (Divisional Editor for Biology 1978-91) and Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics (North American Editor 1978 to present) to foster research in bioelectrochemistry and bioelectromagnetics.

Interdisciplinary Research
My year in Europe for ONR-London gave me a greater awareness of the growing importance of interdisciplinary research. I started to think that it may even have become indispensable for scientific progress as science has become more constrained by growing specialization and dependence on sophisticated instruments. Specialization by its nature tends to limit the scope of scientists, and reduce their awareness of broader scientific issues. The growing dependence upon scientific instruments, while greatly aiding research, has also limited maneuverability for the formulation and testing of new hypotheses. A scientist with a laboratory full of expensive instruments and specialized technicians must think in terms of problems that will utilize the abilities of the equipment and staff rather than focus on interesting research problems. External funding, which requires the scientist to spend a growing proportion of time writing applications, reports, etc., has also had a constraining influence on research. Because many evaluative procedures take publications as evidence of productivity, the scientist is tempted to write papers and do experiments that will result in quick publications, rather than pursue a scientific problem that may require a long term effort. Also, in the peer review system of grant evaluation, there is a definite advantage in avoiding innovative proposals, because someone is apt to be put off by something different and give a proposal a low rating.

These changes in science also appeared to cause changes in the way scientists thought about their research. I noted that most described their activities only in terms of the technique they were using and the particular system they were applying it to. Very few mentioned a problem they were investigating and no one said anything about a hypothesis being tested, let alone one that was deliberately being falsified (Popper, 1959). The scientists were engaged in data gathering, but not for the purpose of testing, or elaborating a paradigm. Although their activity resembled what Kuhn (1969) has characterized as "normal science", it was definitely deficient in the puzzle -solving aspect.

This type of research is best described as old-fashioned Baconian. The inductive method, where observations lead to hypotheses, used to be synonymous with scientific method, but was discredited largely because one cannot merely observe. For observations to be fruitful, it is essential to make them in terms of some expectations. However, one does not need a terribly sophisticated hypothesis to focus attention. Measurements made with a newly developed instrument can be used to see if there are differences between the particular system under investigation and a previously measured system, or if there is a correlation between the new property and an older one. It appears that hypotheses are often merely ways to justify continued accumulation of safe observations.

Obviously, some scientists have overcome these constraints, and interdisciplinary research is often the way. A reason for the success of the interdisciplinary approach may already have been formulated by Koestler, who noted that creativity is the solution of a problem (i.e., when progress in a "situation is blocked" using standard approaches) that involves switching from one way of thinking ("matrix of thought") to another that is not normally included in that context. In his words, creativity is brought about by the "collision of matrices," i.e., when two different ways of thinking about a situation are deliberately focused on a problem, and the conditions are ripe for an interchange. Koestler's discussion of creativity in art as well as science and mathematics suggests that one can promote creativity by arranging a "collision of matrices", as in the creation of new interdisciplinary areas of research. Not all pairings fulfill the criterion for creativity; most represent mullet-disciplinary approaches such as the teaming up of scientists from two disciplines to apply the techniques of a non-biological field to biological systems. Because of its history, bioelectrochemistry has a built-in bias for the "collision of matrices."

Bioelectrochemistry as a Focus
The two branches of bioelectrochemistry had their origins in the controversy between two eighteenth century Italian scientists who tried to explain the contraction of the muscles in a frog's leg when the innervating nerve was touched by metals. Galvani claimed animal electricity was the cause, while Volta claimed the effect was due to the properties of metals in contact with aqueous solutions. The experimental observations and the explanations gave rise to two lines of investigation that we now call electrophysiology where the emphasis is on living cells and electrochemistry which is concerned with non-living systems. Although the development of electrochemistry and electrophysiology have been along different lines, they have developed similar instrumentation. (The voltage clamp of electrophysiology is the potentiostat of the electrochemist.)

There has been relatively little communication between scientists in the two areas, but the common origin gives special advantages for meaningful communication in areas where they have developed different views of the same systems, as in the case of the natural membrane. The physiologist considers the natural membrane as an arrangement of biochemical components and has developed ion-carrier and pore models to explain transport phenomena and equivalent circuits for electrical events. The electrochemist uses ion activities and conductances, surface charges, electrochemical potential differences, etc., to describe electrical phenomena. An electrochemist will not accept the physiological constructs as explanations and is bound to suggest interpretations that have not been part of electrophysiology. This kind of "collision of matrices" probably accounts for the contributions of bioelectrochemistry in applications such as electroporation for incorporating DNA and drugs into cells or in developing ideas about electromagnetic field interaction mechanisms.

Conclusion
Since its appearance, bioelectrochemistry has been at the forefront of interdisciplinary approaches to many scientific and technological problems in biology. The Bioelectrochemistry Gordon Conferences have played a major role in these developments by having the flexibility to focus on different problems over the years, and in bringing together the scientists, engineers and physicians who have been instrumental in developing effective approaches to the problems.

REFERENCES
Popper, KR (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Basic Books.
Routledge and Kegan, P (1963). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.
Kuhn, T (1969). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago.
Koestler, A (1967). The Act of Creation. Dell.
Blank, M (19 ). Interdisciplinary Approaches in Science - Bioelectrochemistry and Biorheology as New Developments in Physiology. ONR-12-75.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

In the exercise of your election rights and privileges as a Member of the Society, you may suggest to the Nominating Committee potential candidates for the positions to be filled. Candidates must be Members of the Society. It would be helpful to determine the potential candidate's willingness to serve before suggesting his/her name.

Article IV, Paragraph 8 of the Constitution states "No Officer or Member of the Board, except the Editor-in-Chief, shall be eligible for election to the same office for two (2) consecutive terms." Current Officers and Board Members and their terms of office are:

OFFICERS

Martin Blank, President (1998)
Betty Sisken, Vice President (1999)
Ben Greenebaum, Editor-in-Chief
Robert Liburdy, Secretary/Treasurer (1998)
Paul Gailey, Secretary/Treasurer Elect (1999)
Richard Luben, Past-President (1997)

BIOLOGICAL/MEDICAL SCIENCES
Craig Byus (1999)
Eugene Goodman (1998)
Henry Lai (1999)
Rosemonde Mandeville (2000)
Steven Miller (2000)
Arthur Rosen (1998)

ENGINEERING/PHYSICAL SCIENCES
Frank Barnes (1999)
Janie Blanchard (1998)
Ken Joyner (2000)

AT LARGE
Jukka Juutilainen (1998)
Niels Kuster (2000)
W. Gregory Lotz (1999)

The following positions have to be filled:

Vice President (President Elect) ________________________

Two (2) Members for the Biological/Medical Sciences, both three (3) year terms (ending 2001)____________________________________________

One (1) Member for the Engineering/Physical Sciences, a three (3) year term (ending 2001)________________________

One (1) Member at Large, for a three (3) year term (ending 2001)________________________

One (1) Secretary, for a one (1) year term (ending 1999) per approved Constitutional Amendment 1997________________________

No particular format for your suggestions is required, but to be considered they must be received by 09 January, 1998 at the address following.

Dr. Richard Luben
University of California
Division of Biomedical Sciences
Riverside, CA 92521-0121
Fax: 909-787-3799
E-mail: richard.luben@ucr.edu

3. Direct Nomination by Petition
To further exercise your rights and privileges in the nominating process, you may nominate by petition, by-passing the Nominating Committee process for naming candidates. The origin of nominations, whether by petition or Nominating Committee action, will not be designated on the official ballot and the candidate's names for each position will be in alphabetical order. With approval of the recent Constitutional Amendment a petition nominating a candidate must contain the signatures and names of five percent (5%) of eligible Members of the Society (for this election 23 names are required) and must be received by January 09, 1998 at Dr. Richard Luben's address given above.

The nominee must consent to stand for election and should submit with the petition a short biographical sketch, which will appear with the Ballot Materials. The format of the sketch should follow the guidelines as follows: Total Length: 8 - 10 typed lines; Format: LAST NAME, First (or normally used) name, middle initial; present job title and affiliation. Education. Professional employment history. Highlights of research and/or professional activities. Research interests. Professional societies, etc.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION INTERNATIONAL EMF PROJECT
by Mike Repacholi

The International EMF Project is a pro-active effort by WHO to resolve, as best as possible, any health issues related to EMF exposure. Seven international organizations and over 40 countries are now supporting or participating in the Project. A logical progression of activities are conducted: independent scientific assessment of health effects from exposure to EMF (0-300 GHz); identification of gaps in knowledge requiring further research in order to obtain high quality scientific information that leads to improved health risk assessments; encouragement of a focused, high quality research agenda; formal WHO health risk assessments after this research is completed; information on risk perception, risk communication, risk management of the EMF issue; information and advice on EMF health issues for national programs and non-governmental institutions; and brochures and fact sheets on various topics of interest on EMF emitting devices and health. Following completion of health risk assessments, the Project will be encouraging the development of internationally acceptable standards for EMF device emission and human exposure limits.

Scientific reviews have now been completed on low-level RF fields (Munich, Nov. 1996) and static and low frequency fields (Bologna, June 1997). Research was identified at these meetings that needs to be completed so WHO can make better health risk assessments. WHO is now encouraging EMF research funding agencies worldwide to direct funds towards studies related to WHO's research agenda. A research coordination meeting of EMF funding agencies and WHO's collaborating institutions is being held in Geneva, 4-5 December, 1997 to: Ensure that all the research needed by WHO is completed in a reasonable time; Avoid unnecessary duplication of research, ensuring that scarce resources for research are used wisely and effectively; Encourage high quality research; Encourage the use of standardised protocols so that results can be easily compared or studies combined, where possible, to allow meta-analyses to be performed; Maintain an updated worldwide inventory of EMF research, researchers and results. Further information on the International EMF Project can be obtained on the Project's home page: http://www.who.ch/programmes/peh/emf/emf_home.htm or

Dr. Michael H Repacholi, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, World Health Organization, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland Tel: +41-22-791-3427, Fax: +41-22-791-4123, E-mail: repacholim@who.ch

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

The World Conference on Breast Cancer was held in Kingston, Ontario, Canada on July 13-17, 1997. Several BEMS members participated in the program regarding possible links between electromagnetic fields and breast cancer. In the Plenary Session, "An Overview of the Links Between Breast Cancer and Environmental Pollutants", Dr. Bary Wilson of Battelle Pacific Northwest National Laboratories, Richland, Washington presented a paper entitled "Overview of Electromagnetic Fields & Breast Cancer." In the Concurrent Sessions: Emerging Issues and New Studies a special session was held on Electromagnetic Fields and Breast Cancer. In this session Dr. Bary Wilson spoke on "Effects of EMF on Melatonin and Breast Cancer in the Laboratory", Dr. Meike Mevissen of the School of Veterinary Medicine in Hannover, Germany presented "EMF and Chemical Interaction: New Research in Germany", and Dr. Henry Lai of The University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, presented "Electromagnetic Fields, DNA Damage and Free Radicals."

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

NO ONE OWNS THE TRUTH
reprinted from The Institute, IEEE (July 30, 1997)

To the editor:
Your "Viewpoint" article (February edition, page 15) regarding EMF controversy is, how could it be otherwise, controversial. Having been in charge of manufacturing and marketing of mobile telephones, I am familiar with the recurring question: "Are they really safe?" And, with many other systems that emit low levels of electromagnetic radiation, the answer has to be, "As far as we know and have been able to prove, yes."

The history of mankind has, if ever so slowly, taught us how little we know. We have polluted our environments, saying, "How could such a small amount have any significant effect?" We have cut down our rainforests, saying the same. We dump our waste in the sea, same reasoning. We build nuclear power plants in spite of the warnings of many. And ever so slowly we are beginning to realize that we were wrong. And not only wrong due to ignorance, but also due to our own collective arrogance. We engineers and scientists were convinced we knew it all. And pressured by market forces, we said, "There is no evidence it is harmful, therefore it can't be."

The controversy will continue, but there is one thing we can and must do: stop pretending that we are the sole owners of the truth. If and when asked whether a device or system that emits low levels of electromagnetic radiation is safe, our answer must be that science so far has not been able to prove the opposite. And if there are commercial forces pressuring us to assert that all is well, we should be able to feel that our professional society will, if necessary, back us up with legal action against those forces. In the end, people have aright to be informed of the truth, so as to enable them to have the free choice of whether to expose themselves to electromagnetic radiation or not.

Cor Coenraads, Benal Madera, Spain

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

No one in our Society can be aware of everything that is going on that is of interest to the bioelectromagnetics community. Please send your editor notices of your new publications, presentations, promotions, honors and awards, job changes, etc. Anything that you see or hear that is of interest to you about bioelectromagnetics or related topics will most likely be of interest to your fellow Society members. I would much rather get 10 notices about an upcoming meeting or event than not hear about it at all. Any communication venue that you choose is fine. Please send the material directly to the editor.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

Reported in Washington Technology, July 24, 1997: "Cell Phones: The cell phone industry is also appealing to the FCC to intervene into local disputes over cell phone antenna sites. Because the FCC has failed to act, local governments are delaying construction of 226 antennas, according to a July 11 letter sent to FCC chairman Reed Hundts by CTIA president, Thomas Wheeler."

A new journal, Biomedical Radioelectronics will be published quarterly in 1998 in Moscow, Russia. The journal will be translated in English. The journal will include articles on biological effects of electromagnetic fields as well as information about new devices for biology, biotechnology and medicine. For more information: (Tel: +7-095-921-4837, Fax: +7-095-925-9241, e-mail: iprzhr@ire.cplire.ru).

A workshop on "Water and Electromagnetic Fields" was held in Puschino, Moscow Region, Russia on September 1-3, 1997. The proceedings will be published by the Russian journal BIOFIZIKA in 1998. For more information contact Vladimir Binhi at binhi@vent.msk.ru.

After 23 years with Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, Walt Rogers is pursuing a traditional academic career of teaching, research and service. Walt has two half-time positions; one with The University of Texas Health Science Center-Houston, School of Public Health at the San Antonio location as an Associate Professor of Environmental Sciences and one with The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio in the Department of Family Practice. Walt plans to continue research in bioelectromagnetics and toxicology. He also plans to continue consulting through Rogers Bioscience Consulting.

The following statements appeared in Canadian newspapers during the World Conference on Breast Cancer:

Ng, KL and DM Hamby (1997). Fundamentals for establishing a risk communications program, Health Physics, Vol. 73 (3), 473-482.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) home page contains references to a variety of other scientific web pages. http://www.epa.gov/rtirmd11/seaind.htm.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

CALENDAR

December 2-5: 1997: Asia-Pacific Microwave Conference, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, PRC. Contact: Prof. K. K. Mei, Telecommunications Research Centre, City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong. (Fax: +852-2778-1711 or +852-2788-7189, e-mail: eekkmei@cityu.edu.hk).

December 7-10: 1997: Annual Meeting of The Society for Risk Analysis, Capitol Hilton Hotel, Washington, D.C. Improving Public Policy Through Risk Assessment and Risk Management. Contact: SRA, 1313 Dolly Madison Blvd., Suite 402, McLean, VA 22101. (Tel: 703-790-1745, Fax: 703-790-2672, e-mail: sra@BurkInc.com, http://www.sra.org).

1998: Second International Conference on Bioelectromagnetism, Sheraton Towers Hotel, Melbourne, Australia. Contact: Dr. Irena Cosic, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton VIC 3168, Australia. (Tel: +61-3-9905-1340, Fax: +61-3-9903-2906 or +61-3-9903-1516, e-mail: cosic@eng.monash.edu.au). http://www.monash.edu.au/oce/lcbem.htm

January 12-14, 1998: EMF Science Review Symposium, Camberly Gunter Hotel, San Antonio, TX. Organized by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and sponsored by the DOE/NIEHS EMF RAPID Program. Contact: Dr. Mary Wolfe, EMF Science Review Symposium, LCBRA, NIEHS, PO Box 12233, MD EC-16, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. (Tel: 919-541-7534, Fax: 919-541-0144, e-mail: wolfe@niehs.nih.gov).

January 21-23, 1998: The Second Waipuna Radiofrequency Meeting, Waipuna International Hotel and Conference Centre, Auckland, New Zealand, Sponsored by The Committee on Radiation and Work of the International Commission on Occupational Health. Contact: Dr. David Black, Eviromedix Ltd., PO Box 26-105, Epsum, Auckland, New Zealand. (Tel: +64-9-625- 4434, Fax: +64 -9-625-2292, e-mail: waipuna@ibm.net).

January 23-25, 1998: Annual Meeting of the North American Academy of Magnetic Therapy, Furama Hotel, Los Angeles, CA. Contact: Cindy Kornspan, North American Academy of Magnetic Therapy, 28240 West Agoura Road, Ste #202, Agoura, CA 91301. (Tel: 818-991-5277 or 800-457-1853).

February 8-11, 1998: 31st Midyear Topical Meeting of the Health Physics Society, Mobile, AL. Theme: Good Practices in Health Physics. Contact: Richard J. Burk, Jr., Health Physics Society, 1313 Dolly Madison Blvd., McLean, VA 22101. (Tel: 703-790-1745, Fax: 703-790-2672, e-mail: hpsburkmgt@aol.com).

May 23-29, 1998: Fourteenth International Symposium on Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vingsted-centret, Denmark. Contact S. Kwee, Department of Medical Biochemistry, University of Aarhus, Building 170, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. (Tel: +45-8942-2869, Fax: +45-8613-1160, e-mail: bes98@biokemi.aau.dk, Website: http://www.health.aau.dk/conf/bes98.htm).

June 7-11, 1998: Annual Meeting of The Bioelectromagnetics Society, The Tradewinds, St. Petersburg, FL. Contact W/L Associates, 7519 Ridge Road, Frederick, MD 21702-3519. (Tel: 301-663-4252, Fax: 301-371-8955. e-mail: 75230.1222@compuserve.com).

July 12-16, 1998: 43rd Annual Meeting of the Health Physics Society, Minneapolis, MN. Contact: Richard J. Burk, Jr., Health Physics Society, 1313 Dolly Madison Blvd., McLean, VA 22101. (Tel: 703-790-1745, Fax: 703-790-2672, e-mail: hpsburkmgt@aol.com).

September 14-18, 1998: International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy. Contact Daniela Floramonti, EMC ‘98 Roma, AEI- Ufficio Centrale, Piazzale R. Morandi 2, 20121, Milano, Italy. (Tel: +39-2-77790.1, Fax: +39-2-79-88-17, e-mail: conferencesaei@aei.it).

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

The BIOELECTROMAGNETICS Society Newsletter is published and distributed to all members of the Society.  Information regarding the Society may be obtained by writing to BEMS, 7519 Ridge Road, Frederick, MD 21702-3519.  Institutions and libraries may subscribe to the Newsletter at an annual cost of $58.50 ($67.50 for overseas subscribers).  The Newsletter serves the membership and subscribers in part as a forum for the presentation of ideas and issues related to bioelectromagnetics research. All submissions to the Newsletter must be signed and reflect the individual views of the authors and not official points of view of the Society or of the institutions with which the authors are affiliated. The Society solicits contributions to the Newsletter from its members and others in the scientific and engineering communities.  News items as well as short research notes and book reviews are welcome. Advertisements inserted and distributed with the Newsletter are not to be considered endorsements.

Submit items for consideration to: M. E. O'Connor, University of Tulsa, Psychology Department, 600 S College, Tulsa, OK 74104-3189.  (Tel: 918-631-2838; Fax: 918-631-2833; Email: OCONNORME@centum.utulsa.edu)

M. E. O'Connor, Editor

For Newsletter items, contact the Editor.

For other Society business, contact: The Bioelectromagnetics Society, 7519 Ridge Road, Frederick, MD 21702-3519.  Tel. 301-663-4252; Fax 301-371-8955; Email: 75230.1222@compuserve.com.

BEMS Homepage:
http://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/index.html

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page