A warning from the T.V.Q. group as to the possibility of Scalar / Tesla experimentation health risks

 

                (word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2)

                      Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501

                           Sponsored by Vangard Sciences

                                    PO BOX 1031

                                Mesquite, TX 75150

                       There are ABSOLUTELY NO RESTRICTIONS

                  on duplicating, publishing or distributing the

                                files on KeelyNet!

                                   March 7, 1991

                                    HEALTH1.ASC

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

                      This file courtesy of Joseph Misiolek.

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

             A warning from the T.V.Q. group as to the possibility of

                   Scalar / Tesla experimentation health risks.

       There has been quite a lot of talk in the popular press concerning

       the possible health   risks   due  to  exposure  to  electromagnetic

       radiation.

       While these articles  concern  themselves   with   the   unavoidable

       exposure to the electromagnetic fields generated by  domestic  power

       wiring and radio  transmissions,  there  is  reason  to believe that

       experimenters who work  on Tesla coils  and  scalar  electromagnetic

       systems may have an additional cause for concern.

       The following entry was downloaded from the Usenet some time ago:

            **********************************************************

          The May/June issue of "Microwave News" contains very big news.

       According to the lead article, the EPA's long-awaited  report on the

       health risks of  electromagnetic  fields  is  about  to be released.

       However, Dr. William Farland, director of EPA's Office of Health and

       Environmental Assessment, apparently  decided  a  few  weeks  ago to

       delete the report's two most important recommendations:

              that 60 Hz powerline fields be classified by EPA as "Probable

              Human Carcinogens" (like formaldehyde and creosote), and

              higher frequency  radio  emissions and microwaves  should  be

              classed as "Possible Human Carcinogens" (like saccharine).

       MN says Dr.  Farland's  justification for deleting these findings is

       that the causal mechanisms are still  not understood, especially the

       relationship between dose  and response, even though  circumstantial

       evidence for some degree of cancer risk can no longer be ignored.

       MN editor Louis Slesin also says that Paul Brodeur will have another

       installment of his  "Annals  of  Radiation"  series  in the July 8th

       issue of the  New  Yorker.   He  may  comment  on  this  latest  EPA

       controversy.

                                      Page 1

       Here are the  concluding  paragraphs  from  the  REVISED (June 1990)

       draft summary of the EPA staff report, as quoted in MN:

          "In conclusion, the several studies  showing  leukemia,  lymphoma

          and cancer of the nervous system in children exposed to magnetic

          fields from  residential  60  Hz  electrical  power  distribution

          systems, supported  by  similar  findings  in  adults  in several

          occupational studies also involving electrical power frequency

          exposures, show a consistent pattern of response that suggests,

          but does not prove, a causal link.  Frequency components higher

          than 60 Hz cannot be ruled out as contributing factors.

          Evidence from a large number of biological test systems shows

          that these fields induce biological effects that are consistent

          with several possible mechanisms of carcinogenesis.  However,

          none of these processes has been experimentally linked to the

          induction of tumors, either in animals or humans, by EMFs

          [electromagnetic fields].  The particular aspects of exposure to

          the EMFs that cause these events are not known.

          "In evaluating the potential for carcinogenicity of chemical

          agents, EPA has developed an approach that attempts to integrate

          all of the available information into a summary classification

          of the overall weight-of-evidence that the agent is carcinogenic

          in humans.

          At this time such a characterization  regarding  the link between

          cancer and exposure to EMFs is not appropriate because  the basic

          nature of  the  interaction between EMFs and biological processes

          is not understood.

          For example, a real possibility  exists  that  exposure to higher

          field strengths is actually less hazardous than  exposure  to low

          field strengths.     Because   of   this   uncertainty,   it   is

          inappropriate to make generalizations  about  the carcinogenicity

          of EMFs.

          As additional studies with more definitive exposure assessment

          become completed, a better understanding of the nature of the

          hazard will be gained.  With our current understanding we can

          identify 60 Hz magnetic fields from power lines and perhaps

          other sources in the home as a possible, but not proven, cause

          of cancer in people.  The absence of key information summarized

          above makes it difficult to make quantitative estimates of risk.

          Such quantitative estimates are necessary before  judgments about

          the degree  of  safety or hazard of a given exposure can be made.

          This situation indicates the need  to  continue  to  evaluate the

          information from ongoing studies and to further evaluate the

          mechanisms of  carcinogenic  action  and  the characteristics  of

          exposure that lead to these effects."

          US subscriptions to MN cost $250/year, $285/year elsewhere.

          Order from:  Microwave News, P.O.  Box 1799, Grand Central

          Station, New York, NY 10163 (212-517-2800).

            **********************************************************

       The uncertainty in linking the electromagnetic field to any possible

                                      Page 2

       carcinogenicity is understandable     in     light     of    several

       epidemiological studies which  attempt   to   correlate   levels  of

       exposure and incidences  of cancers and leukemia.   The  results  do

       show some correlation,  but  not  a  simple one.  For example, homes

       located next to high current power  transformers  do  have  a higher

       rate of incidence,  but not as high as the homes located  one  house

       further away from the same transformer.

       We must keep in mind that these studies are conducted by collecting

       data from field studies and then performing statistical analysis.

       Such a study may not show the cause for a given effect if there is

       more than one agent at work.

       Although the Aharonov-Bohm effect has been proven in the lab, the

       fact that the magnetic field is not a fundamental field is not yet

       accepted or understood by the majority of scientists and engineers.

       If the studies of electromagnetic exposure also included data on the

       relative strengths of the A-fields as well as the B-fields there may

       be a much stronger case for the possible carcinogenic effects.

       To the best  of  our  knowledge, no such study has been conducted to

       date.

       Any such study  would  require the  use  of  a  detector  which  can

       directly measure the intensity of the magnetic vector  potential, or

       A-field.

       Such detectors do  exist,  but  current  A-field  detectors  are not

       practical for such studies.

       With a practical, portable A-field detector, it would be possible to

       go back to the original studies and add the relative field intensity

       data.

       With this new  data,  a direct cause  and  effect  relationship  may

       emerge.

       In his masterpeice of paranoia " Fer-de-lance " T.E.  Bearden  shows

       on page 128,  slide  33,  a  scalar  wave  detector.  This device is

       described as a Bedini version of the  Dea  / Faretto detector.  This

       device employs a permanent magnet with a field strength in excess of

       forty kilogauss.

       This magnet must    then    be   shielded   to   prevent    external

       electromagnetic energy from reaching the coil above the magnet.

       Such a detector is not practical, as the mass of a forty kilogauss

       magnet is considerable  at best, and the shielding needed would have

       a still larger  mass.  It would  be  difficult  to  prove  that  the

       shielding was not saturated, and that any signal  detected  was  not

       electromagnetic in origin.

       Several layers of  shielding  would  be  needed  to prevent magnetic

       coupling of external  electromagnetic   signals   to  the  secondary

       magnetic fields set up in the shielding itself.

       The operation of  this  detector  is  based on the theory  that  the

       magnet's field will be modulated by an incident scalar wave or A-

                                      Page 3

       field. It is  not known to members of this group why the magnet must

       have such a  high  field  strength,  but  we  assume  that  this  is

       necessary to induce  a  signal  in  the  coil strong  enough  to  be

       measured.  The inclusion  of a preamplifier into the detector design

       would seem to support this conclusion.

       Our research group has developed  a  detector  design  which is also

       based upon the magnetic modulation theory, but uses a magnetic field

       which is considerably smaller.  Because the magnetic  field strength

       is much smaller  the shielding problems are also reduced, along with

       the detector's mass.

       This detector design has been proven to have exceptionally high

       sensitivity and is also directional.   By  using  an external pickup

       coil in addition  to  the  detector  it  is possible  to  positively

       determine if any given detected signal is of electromagnetic origin.

       Placed in proximity  to  a  pair  of  conductors  carrying household

       current to a load, this detector shows  an  A-field to be present at

       twice the line frequency.

       This can be understood by referring to page 123, slide 23, of

       " Fer-de-lance ".

       While not exactly light in weight, this new detector is portable and

       most important, could be constructed by experimenters to measure the

       fields generated by whatever devices the experimenter  chooses.   As

       experimenters develop and improve their devices, they must also

       modify the balance  of  electromagnetic  and  scalar  energy  in the

       device.

       Even a simple Tesla coil, with a single  shorted  turn, will produce

       quite large magnetic fields and their associated A-fields.   As  the

       device is improved,  the  potential health risks due to these fields

       increase.

       It is our belief that the ratio of electromagnetic field strength to

       A-field strength is involved in determining the biological effect of

       electromagnetic fields, and that this  accounts for the difficulties

       in determining the carcinogenic agent.

       We are currently investigating several ways to make detailed

       construction plans for   these   detectors   available   to   anyone

       interested in using  them,  either for their own work or for studies

       on the effects of electromagnetic fields on living systems.

       Anyone interested should post E-mail  to  Harold Kobrin's account on

       the TESLA Section of the Colorado Mountain BBS.

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

         If you have comments or other information relating  to such topics

         as  this  paper covers,  please  upload to KeelyNet or send to the

         Vangard  Sciences address  as  listed  on the  first  page.

              Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.

           Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson

                             Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet

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

                     If we can be of service, you may contact

                 Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346

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

                                      Page 4