tailieunhanh - A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard

Ban tổ chức cảm ơn sự tham gia của Nhóm làm việc BioIniative cho tính toàn vẹn của họ và lòng can đảm trí tuệ trong việc đối phó với chủ đề gây tranh cãi và quan trọng, và dành thời gian và năng lượng để sản xuất chương của họ. Các thông tin và kết luận trong mỗi chương là trách nhiệm của các tác giả của chương đó. | Release Date August 31 2007 BioInitiative Report A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields ELF and RF Organizing Committee Carl Blackman USA Martin Blank USA Michael Kundi Austria Cindy Sage USA Participants David Carpenter USA Zoreh Davanipour USA David Gee Denmark Lennart Hardell Sweden Olle Johansson Sweden Henry Lai USA Kjell Hansson Mild Sweden Eugene Sobel USA Zhengping Xu and Guangdin Chen China Research Associate S. Amy Sage USA PREFACE The Organizing Committee thanks the participants of the BioIniative Working Group for their integrity and intellectual courage in dealing with this controversial and important topic and for devoting the time and energy to produce their chapters. The information and conclusions in each chapter are the responsibilities of the authors of that chapter. The Group has produced what the authors hope will be a benchmark for good science and public health policy planning. It documents bioeffects adverse health effects and public health conclusions about impacts of non-ionizing radiation electromagnetic fields including extremely-low frequency ELF-EMF and radiofrequency microwave or RF-EMF fields . Societal decisions about this body of science have global implications. Good public health policy depends on acting soon enough but not without cause and with enough information to guide intelligent actions. To a great degree it is the definition of the standard of evidence used to judge the scientific reports that shapes this debate. Disagreement about when the evidence is sufficient to take action has more to do with the outcome of various reviews and standard-setting proceedings than any other single factor. Whatever standard of 1 evidence is selected to assess the strength of the science will deeply influence the outcome of decisions on public policy. We are at a critical juncture in this world-wide debate. The answers lie not only in the various branches of science but necessarily depend .