September/October 1997
Number 138

A Publication of The Bioelectromagnetics Society

IN THIS ISSUE...

Betty F. Sisken is Professor at the Center for Biomedical Engineering at the University of Kentucky, and Adjunct Professor in the Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology at the University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, Kentucky.

Dr. Sisken received her BS degree in biology and her MS degree in zoology at the University of Connecticut in Storrs, Connecticut. She obtained her Ph.D. in anatomy at the University Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky. Her doctoral research was on the effects of electrical currents on neurite outgrowth of the trigeminal (sensory) ganglia of the chick embryo. She has been on the faculty at the University of Kentucky since obtaining her doctorate. Her research interests are developmental neurobiology and the mechanisms by which electric and electromagnetic fields (EMF) influence growth, differentiation and regeneration of tissue both in culture and in animals. Her experience includes working in the Department of Neurobiochemistry at the City of Hope in Duarte, California, and sabbatical research in the Department of Anatomy in Copenhagen, Denmark and the Department of Physiology at the University of Lund in Lund, Sweden. She has authored or co-authored 42 research publications, and 19 book chapters and conference papers.

Dr. Sisken has considerable experience working with EMF at both the administrative level and in the laboratory. She is a member of the Editorial Board for Bioelectromagnetics (1990-present) and for J Bioelectricity (1985-present). She has been as Associate Editor of the Journal of Orthopaedic Research (1982-1993) and a Guest Editor of the Journal of Bioelectricity in 1984. She has been a member of the Science Advisory Council of the American Paralysis Association (1985-1990) and is presently a member of the Harvard Advisory Committee on Electromagnetic Fields and Human Health of the Harvard School of Public Health (1994-present) as well as the FDA Technical Electronic Products Radiation Safety Standards Committee (1996-1998) of the US Food and Drug Administration.

Dr. Sisken was the Co-Chairperson (1986) and Conference Chairperson (1988) of the Gordon Research Conference on Bioelectrochemistry held in Plymouth, New Hampshire. She was a member of the Board of Directors for the Bioelectromagnetics Society (1991-1994) and on the Executive Committee for the Bioelectrical Repair and Growth Society in 1980. In 1982 she chaired the Program Committee for the meeting of the Bioelectrical Repair and Growth Society in Oxford, England. She also served as a Council Member of the Bioelectrical Repair and Growth Society from 1983-1984 and chaired a special panel at the Winter Conference on Brain Research in 1986. Most recently she served as a Member of the Planning Committee for the First World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine and was on the Technical Program Committee for both the First World Congress in Orlando, Florida in 1992 and the Second World Congress in Bologna, Italy in 1997.

Betty is married to Dr. Jesse Sisken, a cell biologist who is also a member of BEMS. They raised three children in Lexington, Kentucky and together they spent a year’s sabbatical in Copenhagen, Denmark; they all view Denmark as their second home and visit there as often as possible. Betty’s favorite hobby is tennis and she has played competitively on a local women’s US Tennis Association team for the past three years..

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

The 1997 International Symposium of The Lawson Research Institute of London, Ontario, Canada was held from November 14-16 in conjunction with the St. Joseph’s Health Centre. The theme for the symposium was Magnetic Fields: Recent Advances in Diagnosis and Therapy.

The symposium was organized by Dr. Frank Prato who is Co-Director of BioElectroMagnetics Western, Professor and Chair of the Division of Imaging of The Lawson Research Institute, and Chair of the Division of Imaging Sciences of the Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine at the University of Western Ontario. Dr. Prato’s goal was to bring together physicians at the forefront of imaging applications in neonatal and musculoskeletal MRI/MRS and NIRS with researchers looking at potential therapeutic applications of magnetic fields and to also address some of the most recent technological advances in MRI/MRS.

The first session concentrated on High Field Applications in Neonatal/Musculoskeletal MRI/MRS and NIRS. The second session keynote speaker was W. Ross Adey of the University of California, Riverside who spoke on "Physical Regulation of Living Matter as an Emergent Concept in Health and Disease." Other BEMS members who participated were Betty Sisken of the University of Kentucky, who presented on "EMF Stimulation of Nerve Regeneration in vitro and in vivo," Richard Luben of the University of California, Riverside on "Bone Fracture Union: Effects of MF’s on Cells to Structures," R.J. Fitzsimmons of the V.A. Medical Center in Loma Linda, CA on "MF Treatment of Osteoporosis: From Cells toward Clinical Trials," Bruce Simon of Electro-Biology Inc on "Treatment of Osteoarthritis using Pulsed EMF: in vitro, animal, and clinical results," and Mary Ellen O’Connor of the University of Tulsa on "The MF Treatment of Depression and Anxiety Associated with Substance Abuse Withdrawal."

The papers from the session on The Therapeutic Uses of Magnetic Fields will be edited by Martin Kavaliers, K. Peter Ossenkopp and Frank Prato and published as a book in 1998.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

We are very sorry to learn of the sudden death of Dr. Brian Maddock - from a heart attack while on holiday in the Seychelles on October 11, 1997. Brian had 33 years of service with the industry and had retired in 1993.

He joined the Central Electricity Generating board (CEGB) in 1960 as a research physicist at the Central Electricity Research Laboratories at Leatherhead, where he led the team which, in 1967, developed Britain’s first large-bore composite- superconductor magnet -- a forerunner of those now used routinely by hospitals in magnetic-resonance imagers.

In 1970, Brian became head of the Solid State Physics Section and later headed the Superconductivity and Physics Applications Sections at Central Electricity Research Laboratories (CERL). After a brief spell as University Liaison Coordinator for the Technology Planning and Research Division in 1981/82, he went on to lead the Electrical Plant and Systems Section and, in 1988, the Electrical Power Section in the Research Division based at Leatherhead. From 1984 onwards, Brian led the industry’s research effort on the possible health effects of power-frequency electric and magnetic fields, becoming National Grid Co’s (NGC) Project Manager for this work following privatization in 1990. After his retirement, he acted as Administrator for the EMF Biological Research Trust, funded by NGC to commission research into electromagnetic fields and health.

Brian was a Chartered Engineer, a Fellow of the Institution of Electrical Engineers and of the Institute of Physics. He was a leading contributor on many national and international committees, including those of Conference Internationale des Grands Reseaox Electriques a Haute Tension (CIGRE) and Comite European de Normalisation Electrotechnique (CENELEC). As sub-committee chairman, he was influential in the formulation of CENELEC’s provisional standards for environmental low-frequency electric and magnetic field strengths.

Brian was always a popular and respected figure -- courteous, knowledgeable and ready with a thoughtful and pertinent comment on all matters scientific or technical. He will be greatly missed by his many friends and colleagues. He leaves a widow, Janet, and two daughters, Karen and Frances.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

It is unfortunate that an intensity cutpoint of > 2 mG has been widely adopted as the "traditional" index of the high residential magnetic field exposure hypothesized to increase childhood cancer risk. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) study analyzed for that cutpoint and found only weak evidence for a childhood leukemia risk (11). In fact, however, the epidemiological evidence for increased risk of childhood cancer is, and has always been, for a cutpoint of about 3 mG -- a measurement level at which the NCI study found rather good evidence of risk, which they tended to discount, apparently unaware of the consistency and significance of the prior evidence for risk at that level.

In our original work (1) we used the "percent above 3 mG" as our index of seriously high fields (see Table 1 in reference 1). We found that, in our original study place and time, only certain types of homes were at all likely to have ambient fields that high. Those types of homes we called High Current Configuration homes (HCCs) (See Table 2B from reference 2, presented below).

When Tomenius, in Sweden, did the first study using measured fields to estimate exposure (3), his results supported our original impression that the homes with a potential for chronic exposure to fields > 3 mG had increased cancer risk. He saw significantly increased risk estimates at homes with measurements of > 3 mG but no increased risk at homes measured at 2 to 2.9 mG.

The Savitz study was next (4) and there the > 2 mG cutpoint was first introduced. Although the highest risk estimates in that study were seen for measurements above about 3 mG, as Wartenberg and Savitz pointed out in 1993 (5). The 1988 Savitz study chose > 2 mG as the highest exposure level to analyze probably because only 12 subjects had measurements > 3 mG, so analyses at that level had little statistical power. In fact, however, examination of the Savitz data shows an elevated odds ratio for measurements at > 3 mG, but no elevation at all for fields of 2 to 2.9 mG.

The Los Angeles study of childhood leukemia was next (6). It analyzed for a cutpoint of 2.9 mG (the 90th percentile of their measurements) and saw modest evidence of risk at that level (see Table 2-2 in reference 6).

Feychting and Ahlbom (7) next presented data on residential field levels carefully calculated from known parameters of nearby high tension lines. These calculated fields showed evidence of increased risk for fields of > 3 mG, but, like Savitz and Tomenius, showed no evidence of increased risk for fields calculated at 2 to 2.9 mG. The positive findings were limited to the single-family homes where their calculations proved to be most valid. (Fields calculated to be > 2 mG identified homes with contemporaneous measurements of > 2 mG correctly 85% of the time for single-family homes, but only 53% if the time for apartments.)

Olsen et al. (8) used similar calculations based on high tension lines in Denmark, but did not analyze the 3 mG cutpoint. At a cutpoint of > 4 mG, however, they found significant evidence of cancer risk.

Verkasalo et al. (9), using similar calculations in Finland, saw some evidence of increased risk for fields 2 mG (O.R. 1.5, 0.7-2.7 for total childhood cancer and 1.6 (0.3-4.5) for leukemia) but the study does not tell us how much of that increased risk could be attributed to fields > 3 mG. The Verkasalo study is not included in the tables presented here because it was a cohort study rather than a case-control study like the others, and because it looked at high-end exposures (> 4 mG) only for cumulative exposures.

Finally, Preston-Martin et al. (10), using 24-hour measurements in two different rooms to assess exposure in their study of childhood brain tumors, again found evidence of increased risk for measurements > 3 mG, but little evidence of increased risk for fields of 2 to 2.9 mG.

The 1997 NCI (11) study reports increased risk estimates for measurements > 3 mG that are entirely consistent with the risk estimates from prior work.

One other study gives us reason to look at the very high end of residential field exposures for our risk indicator: Homes with evidence of high exposure from ground currents were shown to have increased cancer risk estimates (12). Ground currents, as Zaffanella and his coworkers have shown (13), are a common source of localized fields in the house that are considerably higher than those generally attributed to power lines. Thus, high-ground-current homes will often have "hot spots" at various places in the house where fields in excess of 3 mG commonly occur. A house resident may intermittently spend fairly long periods of time being exposed to fields > 3 mG, near such hot spots.

In summary: Ambient fields of > 3 mG are encountered rarely at residences, so individually these studies have generally shown risk estimates at that level that, although elevated, are imprecise. However, taken as a whole, the accumulated evidence from all the studies appears to show quite consistent and significant evidence that increased cancer risk accompanies measured or carefully calculated fields at the very high end of the field range (over about 3 mG). The same studies show little evidence that fields in the 2 to 2.9 mG range are indicators of risk.

A final caution: Although the 3 mG level appears to be an indicator of some factor associated with childhood cancer risk, it would be premature, at this point, to consider 3 mG as the level of intensity at which risk begins. A > 3 mG measurement may indicate a house where hot spots of 10-20 mG are likely, or a house providing continuous exposure above one or two mG, or it may indicate some other parameter of exposure, or presence of some confounder.

We do not know yet what constitutes a dose of effective magnetic field exposure, if such a dose exists, and we should not be pushed by the desire for early answers into limiting our idea of what constitutes a dose -- or a dose-relationship. All we have, thus far, are indicators. If those indicators fail to yield a dose-relationship, then we may not be looking correctly at what risk factor they are indicating. (For instance, in the Savitz data, fields of > 3 mG strongly indicate homes with evidence of ground current exposure, while fields of 2 to 2.9 mG do not).

Table 1. Childhood cancer studies with measured or calculated residential magnetic fields: Cutpoints at or near 3 mG

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Total Cancer Leukemia

Tomenius 1986 > 3 23 9 4 10

Front door measurements < 3 676 689 239 202

OR (Cl) 2.6 (1.2,5.5) 0.3 (0.1,1.0)

Savitz et al. 1988 > 3 7 5 3 5

Multiple spot measurements < 3 121 202 33 202

OR (Cl) 2.3 (0.8,7.3) 3.7 (0.9,14.7)

Peters et al. 1995 > 2.9 20 11 20 11

24 hr bedroom measurements < 2.9 144 133 144 133

OR (Cl) 1.7 (0.8,3.6) 1.7 (0.8,3.6)

Feychting and Ahlbom 1992 > 3 10 32 7 32

Calculated fields < 3 131 522 31 522

OR (Cl) 1.2 (0.2,2.6) 3.7 (1.6,8.5)

Olsen et al. 1993 > 4 6 3 3 1

Calculated fields < 4 1701 4785 830 1665

OR (Cl) 5.6 (1.7,19.2) 6.0 (0.8,44.0)

Preston-Martin et al. 1996 > 3 11 6

24 hr measurements < 3 91.5 89

(average of two rooms) OR (Cl) 1.8 (0.6,5.0)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Combined OR (Cl) 2.0 (1.4,2.8) 1.6 (1.004,2.6)

p-value for test for p = 0.45 p = 0.006

homogeneity

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Linet et al. 1997 > 3 29 18 29 18

Time-weighted average of < 3 434 445 434 445

multiple measurements OR (Cl) 1.7 (0.9,3.0) 1.7 (0.9,3.0)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Combined OR (Cl) 1.9 (1.4,2.6) 1.6 (1.1,2.4)

p-value for test for p = 0.55 p = 0.01

homogeneity

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Significant p-values for homogeneity tests indicate that it is not appropriate to combine tables

Table 2. Childhood cancer studies with cutpoints at or near 3 mG using only single-family homes in the Feychting, Ahlbom data and using total controls rather than matched controls to calculate the Tomenius O.R.s

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Total Cancer Leukemia

Tomenius 1986 > 3 23 9 4 14

Front door measurements < 3 676 689 239 955

OR (Cl) 2.6 (1.2,5.5) 1.1 (0.4,3.5)

Savitz et al. 1988 > 3 7 5 3 5

Multiple spot measurements < 3 121 202 33 202

OR (Cl) 2.3 (0.8,7.3) 3.7 (0.9,14.7)

Peters et al. 1995 > 2.9 20 11 20 11

24 hr bedroom measurements < 2.9 144 133 144 133

OR (Cl) 1.7 (0.8,3.6) 1.7 (0.8,3.6)

Feychting and Ahlbom 1992 > 3 7 12 5 12

Calculated fields < 3 60 252 14 252

OR (Cl) 2.5 (0.9,6.3) 7.5 (2.7,20.9)

Olsen et al. 1993 > 4 6 3 3 1

Calculated fields < 4 1701 4785 830 1665

OR (Cl) 5.6 (1.7,19.2) 6.0 (0.8,44.0)

Preston-Martin et al. 1996 > 3 11 6

24 hr measurements < 3 91.5 89

(average of two rooms) OR (Cl) 1.8 (0.6,5.0)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Combined OR (Cl) 2.3 (1.6,3.4) 2.2 (1.3,3.6)

p-value for test for p = 0.75 p = 0.10

homogeneity

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Linet et al. 1997 > 3 29 18 29 18

Time weighted average of < 3 434 445 434 445

multiple measurements OR (Cl) 1.7 (0.9,3.0) 1.7 (0.9,3.0)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Combined OR (Cl) 2.1 (1.5,2.9) 1.9 (1.3,2.8)

p-value for test for p = 0.74 p = 0.11

homogeneity

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Explanation of data choices for Table 2:

1) Table 2 uses only data from single-family homes for the Feychting and Ahlbom sample, because the field calculations proved to be more valid at single-family homes than at apartments.

2) For the Tomenius leukemia cases the total control group has been used as the referent, rather than the more limited group of controls originally matched to the leukemia cases for two reasons:

A. The controls chosen to match the leukemia cases were a drastically aberrant group. They included about nine times as many homes with > 3 mG measurements as other controls. It may be unwise to trust such an aberrant sample to represent the underlying population. This is particularly true for analysis of the subgroup of leukemia cases, because the data available for that analysis (Tomenius, Table 6) provides only information on total addresses, not total persons. For the analysis of total cancer, data for persons was available and that data was used here (Tomenius, Table 8).

B. Using the matched controls produced an odds ratio of 0.3 for the > 3 mG cutpoint, a result so far out of line with other estimates that the homogeneity test indicated that those data could not be legitimately combined with the other studies to get an over-all risk estimate.

Table 2B from Reference 2. Daytime 60-Hz magnetic fields measured next to the part of the house nearest to the distribution wires (in gauss).*

* These fields will generally approximate the ambient field inside the part of the house nearest the wires.

# The lowest measurement we regularly used was < 0.0005.

VHCC = Very high current configuration; OHCC = Ordinary high current configuration; OLCC = Ordinary low current configuration

REFERENCES

1. Wertheimer N, Leeper E (1979): Electrical wiring configurations and childhood cancer. Am J Epidemiol, 109:273-284.

2. Wertheimer N, Leeper E (1982): Adult cancer related to electrical wires near the home. Inter J Epidemiol, 11:345-355.

3. Tomenius L (1986): 50-Hz electromagnetic environment and the incidence of childhood tumors in Stockholm county. Bioelectromagnetics, 7:191-207.

4. Savitz DA et al. (1988): Case-control study of childhood cancer and exposure to 60-Hz magnetic fields. Am J Epidemiol, 128:21-38.

5. Wartenberg D, Savitz DA (1993): Evaluating exposure cutpoint bias in epidemiologic studies of electric and magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics, 14:237-245.

6. Peters JM et al. (1995): Exposure to residential electricand magnetic fields and risk of childhood leukemia. EPRI Research Project 2964-01. EPRI TR-04528.

7. Feychting M, Ahlbom A (1992): Magnetic fields and cancer in people residing near Swedish high voltage power lines. IMM Report, Karolinska Institute, Sweden.

8. Olsen JH et al. (1993): Residence near high voltage facilities and risk of cancer in children. Brit Med J, 307:891-895.

9. Verkasalo PK et al. (1993): Risk of cancer in Finnish children living close to power lines. Brit Med J, 307:895-899.

10. Preston-Martin S et al. (1996): Los Angeles study of residential magnetic fields and childhood brain tumors. Am J Epidemiol, 143:105-119.

11. Linet MS et al. (1997): Residential exposure to magnetic and acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children. New Eng J Med, 337:1-7.

12. Wertheimer N et al. (1995): Childhood cancer in relation to indicators of magnetic fields from ground current sources. Bioelectromagnetics, 16:86-96.

13. Zaffanella LE (1993): Survey of residential magnetic field source, Vol 1: Goals, results and conclusions. EPRI Research Project 3335-02. EPRI TR-102759-V1.

Return to Contents

Return to Publications Page
Return to Society's Home Page  

Dr. W. Ross Adey is Professor of Biochemistry at the University of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0121.

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

From the New Zealand National Research Laboratory. Electric and Magnetic Fields and Your Health: An Information Brochure on Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated with Transmission Lines, Distribution Lines and Electrical Equipment. Available from: National Radiation Laboratory, PO Box 25-099, Christchurch, New Zealand. (Tel: +1 64 3 366 5059, Fax: +1 64 3 366 1156)

From the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. 1997 Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents. ISBN 1-8882417-19-4. Available from ACGIH, 1330 Kemper Meadow Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45240-1634, cost US$15. (Tel: 513-742-2020, Fax: 513-742-3355, e-mail: pubs@acgih.org, URL: http://www.acgih.org).

Bailey, WH, Su, SH, Bracken, TD, and Kavet, R (1997). Summary and evaluation of guidelines for occupational exposure to power frequency electric and magnetic fields, Health Physics, Vol 73 (3), 433-453.

Binninger, DM and V Ungvichian. (1997). Effects of 60-Hz AC magnetic fields on gene expression following exposure over multiple cell generations using Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 83-89.

Carpenter, DO (1997). Possible effects of electromagnetic fields on the nervous system and development. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Review, Vol 3 (3), 270-274.

Donnellan, M, McKenzie DR, French, PW (1997). Effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation at 835 MHz on growth, morphology and secretory characteristics of a mast cell analogue, RBL-2H3. Cell Biology International, Vol 21 (7), 427-439.

Dromashko SE, Kvitko OV, Pisarchik GA (1997). Effects of electric field on Drosophila melanogaster. Russian Journal of Ecology, Vol 28 (4), 275-277.

Farrell JM, Barber M, Krause D, Litovitz TA (1997) Effects of low frequency electromagnetic fields on the activity of ornithine decarboxylase in developing chicken embryos. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 91-96.

French PW, Donnellan M, McKenzie DR (1997). Electromagnetic radiation at 835 MHz changes the morphology and inhibits proliferation of a human astrocytoma cell line. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 13-18.

Grissom CB, Natarajan E, McCormick DB, Suttie JW, Wagner C (1997). Use of magnetic fields effects to study coenzyme B-12-dependent reactions. In: Methods in Enzymology. San Diego, CA, Academic Press, 235-247.

Kenny JS, Kisaalita WS, Rowland G, Thai C, Foutz T (1997). Quantitative study of calcium uptake by tumorigenic bone (TE-85) and neuroblastoma x glioma (NG108-15) cells exposed to extremely-low-frequency (ELF) electric fields. FEBS Letters, Vol 414 (2), 343-348.

Klug S, Hetscher M, Kramer K (1997). The lack of effects of nonthermal RF electromagnetic fields on the development of rat embryos grown in culture. Life Sciences, Vol 61 (18), 1789-1810.

LeLorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F (1997). Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. New England Journal of Medicine, Vol 337 (8), 536-542.

Li CY, Theriault G, Lin RS (1997). A validity analysis of residential magnetic fields estimated from high-voltage transmission lines. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, Vol 7 (4), 493-504.

Lin H, Opler M, Head M, Blank M, Goodman R (1997). Electromagnetic field exposure induces rapid. transitory heat shock factor activation in human cells. Journal of Cellular Biochemistry, Vol 66 (4), 482-488.

Mailhes JB, Young D, Marino AA, London SN (1997). Electromagnetic fields enhance chemically induced hyperploidy in mammalian oocytes. Mutagenesis, Vol 12 (5), 347-351.

McCraig CD, Zhao M (1997). physiological electromagnetic fields modify cell behaviour. Bioassays, Vol 19 (9), 819-826.

Mehedintu M, Berg H (1997). Proliferation response of yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae on electromagnetic field parameters. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 67-70.

Miller HK (1997). The EMF controversy: Are electromagnetic fields dangerous to your health? Materials Evaluation, Vol 55 (9), 994-998.

Reipert BM, Allan D, Dexter TM (1997). Apoptosis in haemopoietic progenitor cells exposed to extremely low frequency magnetic field. Life Sciences, Vol 61 (16), 1571-1582.

Santoro N, Lisi A, Pozzi D, Pasquali E, Serafino A, Grimaldi S (1997). Effect of extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic field exposure on morphological and biophysical properties of human lymphoid cell line (Raji). Biochimica et Biophysica Acta: Molecular Cell Research, Vol 1357 (3), 281-290.

Scarfi MR, Lioi MB, DellaNoce M, Zeni O, Franceschi C, Monti D, Castellani G (1997). Exposure to 100 Hz pulsed magnetic fields increases micronucleus frequency and cell proliferation in human lymphocytes. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 77-81.

Schimmelfpeng J (1997). Cyclic AMP-levels of retinoic acid primed HL-60 cells in serum-free medium influenced by a 50-Hz magnetic field alone and as co-factor to prostaglandin E-2. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 55-59.

Schimmelfpeng J, Dertinger H (1997). Action of 50-Hz magnetic fields on cAMP content in SV40-3T3 cells: Dependence on flux density and extracellular calcium. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 55-59.

Theriault G, Li CY (1997). Risks of leukaemia among residents close to high voltage transmission electric lines. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol 54 (9), 625-628.

Tuinstra R, Greenebaum B, Goodman EM (1997). Effects of magnetic fields on cell-free transcription in E-coli and HeLa extracts. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 7-12.

Valtersson U, Mild KH, Mattson MO (1997) Ornithine decarboxylase activity and polyamine levels are different in Jurkat and CEM-CM3 cells after exposure to a 50-Hz magnetic field. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Vol 43 (1), 169-172.

Ubeda A, Diaz-Enriquez M, Parreno A (1997). Hematological changes in rats exposed to weak electromagnetic fields. Life Sciences, Vol 61 (17), 1651-1655.

Wenzl TB (1997). Estimating magnetic field exposure of rail maintenance workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, Vol 58 (9), 667-671.

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  

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).

February 15-19, 1998. 2nd international Conference on Bioelectromagnetism, Sheraton Towers Hotel, Melbourne, Australia. Sponsored by the International Society for Bioelectromagnetism. Contact: Maureen Kemp or Irene Thavarajah, Office of Continuing Education, Monash University, Wellington Rd., Clayton 3168 Australia. (Tel: +61 3 9905 1340. Fax: +61 3 9905 1343, e-mail: maureen.kemp@adm.monash.edu.au, URL: http://www.monash.edu.au/oce/).

March 10-12, 1998. Control of Workplace Hazards for the 21st Century: Setting the Research Agenda, Hyatt Regency Hotel, Chicago, Illinois. Sponsored by The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA), and The American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE). Contact: Jocelyn Mitchell. (Tel: 404-880-0006, ext 229, Fax: 847-768-3434). Check the NIOSH Homepage for updated conference information: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/homepage.html.

April 1-2, 1998: 34th Annual Meeting of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Crystal City Marriott, Arlington, VA. Contact: William M. Beckner, 7910 Woodmont Ave., Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20814-3095. (Tel: 301-657-2652, Fax: 301-907-8768, e-mail: ncrp@ncrp.com).

May 23-29, 1998: Fourteenth International Symposium on Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics. Vingstedcentret, 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).

June 7-13, 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, Website: http://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/index.html).

July 11-15, 1998. 33rd Microwave Power Symposium, Inter-Continental Hotel, Chicago, IL. Sponsored by the International Microwave Power Institute: Contact: Richard Gedye, Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON P3E 2C6 Canada. (Tel: 705-675-1151 x 2104, e-mail: Rgedye@nickel.laurentian.ca).

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