Moulder and Valberg seem to be able to cite significant evidence that suggests there is no danger. How can that be?
a. In September of 2000, there was an extraordinary event, the publication of the British Journal article. In that article, the prime authors of all the significant epidemiological research of the past five years came together ad admitted their original research has come to invalid conclusions. Whereas they had originally concluded there was not a statistically significant relationship between ELF-EMF and cancer, they now conceded that their original research should have recognized the existence of such a significant relationship. These results were confirmed by two additional research groups. Moulder and Valberg, while aware of the new research, justify their assertions by pointing both to invalidated research and to blue panels that, relying upon the now-invalidated research, had found insufficient evidence for such a relationship. In addition, Moulder frequently distorts the findings of his references by pejoratively picking sentences out of context.
Related Questions
- Assuming that a significant number of existing District Council Members will be elected to the new Council will they be able to sit on other Committees they sit on at the moment?
- How were Audubons scientists able to determine that many bird species are showing significant northward and inland movement?
- Moulder and Valberg seem to be able to cite significant evidence that suggests there is no danger. How can that be?
