|
Abstract
Appleton and McCrossan
undertook a study for the U.S. Army at Ft. Monmouth
to determine if microwave exposure would cause cataracts. They concluded: “The comparison showed the groups
[microwave exposed vs. not exposed] to be essentially the same and did not
support the hypothesis that human cataracts are being caused by chronic
exposure to microwaves in the military environment in this country”. There are three major flaws in Appleton
and McCrossan’s work. First, the exposed group likely included
people with little or no exposure.
This would tend to minimize the possibility of finding microwave
effects. Secondly, their control group
consisted of people working with equipment known to cause eye damage. This would also tend to minimize the
possibility of finding microwave effects.
Secondly, their control group consisted of people working with
equipment known to cause eye damage.
This would also tend to minimize the possibility of finding microwave
effects. Thirdly, and most important,
they did not do a statistical analysis on their data. When the writer did one, it was found that
Appleton and McCrossan have a statistically
significant difference between groups, with the microwave exposed showing
more or lens opacities than would be expected by chance. Thus, their
conclusion should have been the opposite of what they stated. It is the uncritical acceptance of
“negative” biological studies of non-ionizing radiation, such as this, that
has contributed to the distortion of science in this area of research and has
stimulated public opposition to the installation of such energy sources.
|