17
THE POSSIBLE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN
CHRONIC LYMPHOCYTIC LEUKEMIA AND
EXPOSURE TO ELECTRIC AND
MAGNETIC FIELDS
 
D WARTENBERG
 
INTRODUCTION
 
    Following Wertheimer and Leeper's seminal study of childhood cancer in 1979 (1), many investigators have studied the possible association between cancer and exposure to electric and magnetic fields. There have been 16 residential childhood cancer studies, 8 residential adult cancer studies, and several dozen occupational studies (2). Overall, the studies provide an intriguing but somewhat confusing picture (3). However, only magnetic fields are believed to show any possible association.
 
EXPOSURE AND HEALTH EFFECTS
 
Measures of Exposure
 
    One challenge has been how best to describe exposure to magnetic fields (eg, distance from power lines, wire codes, direct measurement, calculations based on historical loads). In addition, a variety of different metrics have proposed and/ or used to describe the exposure (eg, wire codes, distance, time weighted average magnetic field, median magnetic field, percent of time above a specified threshold, variability of magnetic field). This disparity in exposure assessment provides challenges for the comparison and interpretation of study results. In occupational studies, early studies used job titles to infer exposure.  Four recent studies combine job history information with magnetic field measurements of specific tasks to give integrated exposure estimates.
 
Health Effects and Confounders
 
    Most studies examined both leukemia and brain cancer occurrence, either as incidence or mortality. Only some of the studies reported subdivisions of these classes of cancer. Some have looked at other cancers in addition. Most studies adjust for some confounding variables (eg, age, urban/rural, socio-economic status, traffic density, occupational exposure to solvents or ionizing
radiation), but the array of confounders considered varies from study to study.
 
    Overall, the studies show a moderately consistent association between residential proximity to power lines and childhood leukemia. In occupational studies, there tend to be associations between leukemia, brain cancer and time weighted average magnetic fields. However, there is a moderate disparity among reported relative risks, and a sampling of studies that do not show these associations.
 
    Three of the four most recent occupational studies report data on chronic lymphocytic leukemia (See Table 1). These data, as with most magnetic field epidemiology, are suggestive but inconsistent. Even if magnetic field exposure is a risk factor for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and if the time weighted average magnetic field is the appropriate measure, on average the size of the risk is relatively small.
 
 
REFERENCES
 
  1. Wertheimer N, Leeper E. Electrical wiring configurations and childhood cancer. American
       Journal of Epidemiology1979; 109(3):273-84.
  2. Savitz D, Ahlbom A. Epidemiologic evidence on cancer in relation to residential and
      occupational exposures. In: D Carpenter. Biologic Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields.
      New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1994: 233-61.
  3. Wartenberg D. EMFs and health: Cutting through the controversy. Public Health Reports
      1996; 111:204-215.
  4. Floderus B, Persson T, Stenlund C, Wennberg A, Ost A, Knave B. Occupational exposure
      to electromagnetic fields in relation to leukemia and brain tumors: a case-control study in
      Sweden. Cancer Causes and Control 1993; 4:465-76.
  5. Sahl J, Kelsh M, Greenland S. Cohort and nested case-control studies of hematopoietic
      cancer and brain cancer among electric utility workers. Epidemiology 1993; 4:104-14.
  6. Theriault G, Goldberg M, Miller A, et al. Cancer risks associated with occupational exposure
      to magnetic fields among electric utility workers in Ontario and Quebec, Canada, and Fra.
      American Journal of Epidemiology1994; 139(6):550-72.
  7. Savitz D, Loomis D. Magnetic field exposure in relation to leukemia and brain cancer
      mortality among electric utility workers. American Journal of Epidemiology 1995;
     141:123-34.
 
 Return To Contents