Xref: utzoo rec.ham-radio:3571 sci.med:3707 sci.electronics:1835 sci.misc:684 sci.physics:2736
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!ucdavis!uop!robert
From: robert@uop.edu (Robert McCaul -- The Equalizer)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,sci.med,sci.electronics,sci.misc,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Cancer and Electromagnetic Radiation
Keywords: Cancer, Radio, Electromagnetic Radiation, ANSI, Chemical Hazards
Message-ID: <886@uop.edu>
Date: 9 Jan 88 17:56:10 GMT
References: <1077@kodak.UUCP> <2174@vice.TEK.COM> <1562@mind.UUCP>
Organization: Odds Against You? Inc.
Lines: 15

In article <1562@mind.UUCP>, greg@mind.UUCP (Greg Nowak) writes:
> In article <2174@vice.TEK.COM> keithl@vice.TEK.COM (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
> Let's not forget that hams are also not a random sampling. For
> starters, they probably have much higher disposable income than
> average... which would affect a number of other things, such as diet,
> travel, and so on. Given these factors, I don't find the

also many hams i know are vets, that is to say, they were exposed to
situations and environs that most of us were not.. my room-mate dan,
his dad was with the 101st ABN in WW-II. he was later used in nuke
tests, he and his group were in trenches 10 miles from a test, all the
guys at the 8 mile trench are dead or on the way with cancer and
other auto immune troubles.. not to say this is true for everyone,
but many hams i know have been in military or other technical service,
and exposed to more than their share of many things..