Value chain · CLM-1324
Low confidence
The evidence behind this statement is thin, indirect or second-hand. Read it as a lead to check, not as a settled finding.
In plain terms
In 1981 two US officials said America still had no enforced microwave exposure standard and that its proposed limit was among the most permissive in the world. They reported the view of some that the gap with the Soviet Union came from different evidence and different readings of it, and said closer medical checks on Soviet workers may explain why Soviet studies report many mild, reversible symptoms at very low levels.
The claim as recorded
A 1981 conference talk by two US government staff, speaking for themselves, states that the United States remained virtually alone among industrialised nations in not having an established and rigorously enforced RF and microwave exposure standard for workers and the general population, and that the proposed 1981 ANSI guideline allowed some of the highest exposures in the world in certain parts of the spectrum. It says the gap between the proposed US standard and those in the USSR and other European countries remained large. It attributes the gap, in the views of some, to different bioeffects data bases and their interpretation, and reports speculation by some that stricter legal prosecution of industry in those countries may explain their conservative standard setting. It says clinical oversight of workers in the USSR and parts of eastern Europe was far more detailed, which may explain why their literature reports many subjective, reversible symptoms at very low RF levels. It lists the main bioeffect concerns of 1977-1981, including possible genetic and co-carcinogenic effects, calcium efflux from brain tissue at particular frequency and power windows, behavioural effects, and effects on the blood-brain barrier and immune function.
Evidence behind this: T5, a conference talk given in a personal capacity; it permits "the talk states Y". Explanations are given as the views of some, or as speculation.
Scope and limits
No limit values are on the pages held; the talk's Figure 3, the standards table, is missing from the file. The causes are offered as others' views or speculation, and the speakers say the views are not their agencies'. The concerns listed are topics that drew attention, not findings the talk endorses.
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
PDF p.8 / printed 5: "the United States remains virtually alone among industrialized nations of the world in not having an established and rigorously enforced RF/microwave radiation exposure standard(s) for occupational and general population". PDF p.9 / printed 6 (render read): "proposed '81 ANSI RF guideline allows some of the highest exposures in the world, in certain portions of the spectrum"; "The gap between the proposed U.S. standard and those already promulgated in the U.S.S.R. and other European countries remains large"; attributable "(in the views of some) to the differing non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation bioeffects data bases"; "more rigorous legal prosecution". PDF p.10 / printed 7: clinical examination "far more detailed and rigorous"; "subjective and reversible symptoms". PDF p.6, Figure 2: "CALCIUM EFFLUX IN BRAIN TISSUE (Frequency and power-window effects)". PDF p.7 / printed 4: "the possible effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation on immune function".
Basis: qualitative; no limit values on the pages held
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-001 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-1324
CLM-1324, Energy Aperture, as of 1981-08.