Epidemiology,the press and the EMF controversy

Abstract

Epidemiological study of the adverse health effects from exposure to electromagnetic fields has become an issue of public concern over the past decade. The public, in general, rely on mass media coverage of epidemiological studies for information regarding the nature, extent and severity of the risks. We review the press coverage of this issue in three major, US national newspapers in terms of epidemiological goals, noting strengths and weaknesses of the reporting. Our principal goal is to determine whether epidemiologists are getting their message across, and how could they do so more effectively. We find that: (1) coverage is sparse; (2) issues are presented in a framework consistent with the primary investigator's interpretation; (3) there is little critical evaluation of the investigators' views; (4) little context is provided of the risks of exposure to EMFs as compared with other environmental hazards; and (5) few recommendations are given for avoiding or remedying exposure. The press do, however, present adequately the uncertainty in our knowledge base on this issue and do provide a wide range of `expert' opinions. We conclude with a set of recommendations to scientists and other sources for responding to press inquiries in a meaningful way.