[1] "Cathode-Ray Tubes Explained," Macworld , July 1990, 139.

[2]H. Frölen and B.-M. Svedenstal, "The Effect Of A Pulsed Magnetic Field On Fetal Development In The Mouse: Complementing and Expending on a Previously Reported Investigation," in Work With Display Units, Second International Conference, Montreal, September 1989.
This Swedish National Institute of Radiation Protection funded project reported that the number of placenta resorbtions in the very early mouse-pregnancy period was almost 100% above the control group's for animals in pulsed 60Hz 15 µ Tesla magnetic fields. Conversely, animals exposed to EMF later in pregnancy, when cells split more slowly and are more specialized, had similar resorbtion rates to the control animals' resorbtions. This is particularly troubling because, if there is a similar human propensity, the most dangerous period could be immediately after conception, before the pregnancy is confirmed.

[3]Nair et al., Ibid, p.45.
Bassett C.A.L., R.J. Pawluk and A.A. Pilla. "Augmentation of Bone Repair by Inductively Coupled Electromagnetic Fields." Science 184:575-577, 1974.
C.A.L. Bassett, N. Mitchels and S.R. Gaston, "Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields in Unlimited Fractures and Failed Arthrodeses," Journal of the American Medical Association 247:623-627, 1982. Referring to Bassett et al. work, Nair et al. state on page 45 "Growth and repair in bones have been associated with pulsed ELF fields used clinically and several studies have examined the effects of 60Hz fields on bone growth and repair."

[4]See discussion of studies in Footnotes [1] and [2].

[5]Visual Display Terminals and Workers' Health, World Health Organization (WHO) Offset Publication #99, Geneva, 1987. This publication covered research reported before May 1986, noting that then available evidence did not prove a link and acknowledged that future studies could change this conclusion.
Jerry Borrell, "Technology and Science in the Late Twentieth Century: ELF Emissions," Macworld, December 1990. Deborah Branscum, "Washington rethinks ELF Emissions: the FDA presses Computer Manufacturers for Action," Macworld, December 1990.
Paul Brodeur, "The Magnetic-Field Menace," Macworld, July 1990, 136-145.
American Medical Association vice president Dr. William Hendee appears to hedge, agreeing that sitting at arm's length from a VDT is a good idea (Branscum, December 1990). However, initial results from more recent European works (1991) seem to indicate that one arm is not a sufficiently reliable measuring unit. The length of the screen diagonal is of more relevance since a distance equal to twice this diagonal appears to delineate the most harmful resonance area. Several of the cited Macworld articles provide a history of institutional and governmental reluctance and/or inability to deal with or acknowledge VDT problems.

[6]G. LaBar, "Electromagnetic Fields: the Problem with Power," and "The VDT Riddle," Occupational Hazards, October 1990: 91-98.
Paul Brodeur, "Annals of Radiation: Part III, Video Display Terminals." The New Yorker, June 26, 1989.
Most observers are surprised when told there have never been any tests using actual computer VDTs to test VDT impacts on biological systems. S.E.I.C. theorizes that VDT radiation could be much more dangerous than radiation attempting to simulate VDT radiation. Perhaps because scientists have not considered this possibility, they generally represent that tests using simulated VDT radiation demonstrate what would happen had they used actual VDTs. The LaBar article, like many others, creates the impression that actual VDTs were used when, in fact, laboratory generated EMF was used. "Other studies have shown no correlation" (contexts refers to correlation between using VDTs and risk of miscarriage). Despite extensive research, Brodeur could not find any tests using actual VDTs.

[7]Nair et al. ibid, p.27.
Experiments indicate that there are potentially dangerous frequency and intensity windows. For a particular value or frequency, some field intensities produce the effect, but others do not. Conversely, if an effect is observed at a particular value of field, it might be "tuned out" by changing the frequency of the field. The "windowed" nature of these effects imply that when one looks at experimental results, one must bear in mind that even when there is no effect at some field values there may be effects at other, lower or higher values. In other words, a 'more is worse' paradigm does not hold. For the cellular level phenomenon at least, it is not true that a larger value of the field shows a larger, or even any effect, compared to a smaller value of field.
C.F. Blackman, S.G. Benane, D.E. House, J.R. Rabinowitz, and W.T. Joines, "ELF Electromagnetic Fields cause enhanced Efflux of Neutral Sugars from Brain Tissue in Vitro." Report, Abstract, Ninth Annual Meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, Portland, Oregon, June 21-25, 1987.

[8]R. Coontz, "War of Currents," Exploratorium Quarterly, Vol. 14, No 3, Fall 1990.

[9]During "one of the bitterest corporate struggles of the 19th Century," George Westinghouse and Thomas Edison battled over U.S. power system planning. Thomas Edison argued that AC (alternating current) power was more dangerous to biological systems. Edison sought support for his alternative DC (direct current) power plant and associated grid system. Edison lost. In hindsight, perhaps this is unfortunate. Nevertheless, 60Hz AC (50Hz in Europe) became the standard. Westinghouse prevailed primarily because he had transformers and Edison did not. Transformers allowed Westinghouse to "step up" power voltages, efficiently transport power over distances, and concentrate his power generating plants. Changing the voltage of direct current was not possible with 19th Century technology.

[10]Deborah Branscum, ibid.
Branscum indicates the FDA wants manufacturers to do something about the problem. Apple spokesperson Marianne Lettieri indicated that Apple wants a government standard so it (Apple) has an emission target. "When I (Branscum) mentioned the new Swedish purchasing guidelines, she (Lettieri) almost exploded." "We want answers. We are trying to be open-minded. That's why we are willing to put money, time and effort behind this issue. But you are asking us to target something that doesn't exist. Even the Swedish procurement specification is based on what is achievable. But is it safe? No one knows."

[11]Paula Lyons, Good Morning America interview with Macworld staff, October 2, 1990. However, see Footnote [8] above in fine regarding the validity of "one arm" as a recommended measurement unit. Furthermore, keyboard extender wiring does not solve the problem of inducted currrents which keep flowing through the extender itself.

[12]Carl Blackman, "Observations on Development of Mechanisms of Action for Electric-and-Magnetic Field Effects," Bioelectromagnetics Society Newsletter, Sept.-Oct. 1991, No 102.
"There have been a number of attempts to provide a mechanistic basis for the biological effects reportedly caused by exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMFs). ... This task for the physical scientist has been made difficult because in many cases the effective intensities are at or below the conventional estimates of noise in the biological systems. ... Although these and other theoretical analyses by physical scientists have been welcome in the biological community, failure of these analyses on the most part to provide biologically convincing model situations has left the biological community without sufficient mechanistic support upon which to develop new categories of focused experiments."

[13]Mac Bulletin, Macworld, December 1990.
"In the first admission by a company that electromagnetic fields harmed an employee, Boeing has settled a lawsuit with Robert Strom who developed leukemia after working in a Boeing electromagnetic pulse laboratory. Strom and his family will receive more than $500,000 in cash and additional annuity. The suit alleged in part that Boeing, while knowing that very high levels of electromagnetic fields might be harming lab workers, arranged for repeated physical examinations without revealing that the purpose of the exams was to study possible health damage. Electromagnetic fields that emanate from computer CRTs at a much lower intensity have recently come under scrutiny as potential health hazards."

[14]National Association of Working Women (9 to 5), VDTs, Pregnancy and Radiation, Undated Brochure. Brochure lists a series of pregnancy problem clusters among VDT workers.