Data analysis reveals significant microwave-induced eye damage in humans.
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  also would 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 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.
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002386:Cataract / Q000209:etiology*; D004781:Environmental Exposure; D005123:Eye / Q000528:radiation effects*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008872:Microwaves / Q000009:adverse effects*; D008875:Middle Aged; D013223:Statistics as Topic