Health risks of electromagnetic fields. Part III: Risk analysis.
The management of potential health risks from electromagnetic (EM) fields presents both scientific and nonscientific challenges. When the scientific evidence is ambiguous, as is the case with EM fields, expert judgment of this evidence becomes particularly important. This article provides biomedical researchers with a comprehensive assessment of the status of EM health risk based on our two previous articles [Parts I and II, Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering, Volume 31, Issue 3]. Ambiguous evidence also necessitates rigorous public debate. This article also discusses effective risk communication approaches that play a key role in the EM risk issue. Because of uncertainty about health risks associated with EMF exposure, the public is more likely to experience difficulty in evaluating the available information and rely more on perceptions than facts when drawing conclusions. Even the most effective risk communication approaches are not likely to clarify all of the subtleties surrounding EM fields as a population health issue. Thus it is essential that all stakeholders involved in this issue participate in developing consensus solutions.
Brodsky
Lynn M
LM
McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment, Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Habash
Riadh W Y
RW
Leiss
William
W
Krewski
Daniel
D
Repacholi
Michael
M
D001294:Attitude to Health; D003142:Communication; D004574:Electromagnetic Fields; D004781:Environmental Exposure / Q000009:adverse effects*; D006283:Health Physics / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D010465:Perception; D011639:Public Opinion; D011832:Radiation Injuries / Q000209:etiology* / Q000517:prevention & control; D011835:Radiation Protection / Q000379:methods*; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D012307:Risk Factors; D017751:Safety Management / Q000379:methods*