WHO EHS Fact Sheet

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

WHO EHS Fact Sheet

Marc Martin
Administrator
Hi all,

Someone sent me a link to the WHO EHS fact sheet:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs296/en/index.html

Marc

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WHO EHS Fact Sheet

Andrew McAfee
These are statements from the WHO "fact" sheet:
"The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect
EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals. Well
controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms
were not correlated with EMF exposure."
"There are also some indications that these symptoms may be due to
pre-existing psychiatric conditions as well as stress reactions as a
result of worrying about EMF health effects, rather than the EMF
exposure itself."

I can understand why this would be written. And I can understand who
would want this and these statements are still a bunch of bull shit.
Andrew


On Jan 11, 2006, at 3:56 PM, Marc Martin wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Someone sent me a link to the WHO EHS fact sheet:
>
> http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs296/en/index.html
>
> Marc
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WHO EHS Fact Sheet

carazzz
Right on, Andrew. Eventually these clowns will develop EMF-related health problems too. A
small consolation but it's all I've got.

~Cara

--- In [hidden email], Andrew McAfee <amcafeerr@n...> wrote:

>
> These are statements from the WHO "fact" sheet:
> "The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect
> EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals. Well
> controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms
> were not correlated with EMF exposure."
> "There are also some indications that these symptoms may be due to
> pre-existing psychiatric conditions as well as stress reactions as a
> result of worrying about EMF health effects, rather than the EMF
> exposure itself."
>
> I can understand why this would be written. And I can understand who
> would want this and these statements are still a bunch of bull shit.
> Andrew
>