Having realized that the questions of EM radiation had only a negligible effect on these animals, and that for the sake of verification he pushed the reflection to know if the disorders met here and there could have another origin, he poses the question and tries the following explanation:
But where is the problem?
In the second half of the 20th century, the extension of the HV and THT network has responded to a demand from the population that has accompanied technological progress, creating new needs, and reshaping the distribution of the population, residing more and more. more in urban area. To avoid using the phrase "civilization of the electric whole" in which some opponents are happy to see an ideological connotation, the problem can be summed up by saying that the energy consumption of large cities requires a contribution from the outside and therefore from lines that necessarily borrow rural areas.
... introduction which puts forward a hypothesis of the possible track, almost of a "somatic" nature ... Which leads him to suggest / suspect indirect causes and not necessarily due to ME ...:
In the same period, however, the organization of immigration unprecedented, moving this activity from its traditional roots to animal production tending towards rationality, in which the breeder is forced, with a constantly diminishing workforce, to ensure tasks of increasing complexity and modernize its operations, buildings and equipment, to produce more, under penalty of disappearance.
... which makes the confinement around the paradigm, the rejection of the fault of other troubles on the high voltage lines credible, which become a place of claim (certainly legitimate) but certainly symbolic (! ... ' interpret me too )
Then the verification "in the field", with necessarily a priori on the basis of the above reflection:
In this contexttrade (live animals, farm produce) is intensifying within the territory and with neighboring countries. For both reasons, increased productivity and trade, pathology changes facies, and major infectious diseases (tuberculosis, foot-and-mouth disease, etc.) eradicated by organized prophylaxis measures, give way to livestock diseases, often chronic, often multi-factorial, affecting a high percentage of the workforce and difficult eradication. These are either infectious, bacterial (eg bovine paratuberculosis) or viral (eg BVD, for bovine viral diarrhea) or metabolic diseases, such as rumen acidosis under one or other of its evolutionary forms.
... it should be noted at this stage that its "nanalysis" is not unfounded ... Indeed, acidosis is also observed in humans ("normal" and characteristic metabolic reaction), all as can be the source of acid / base imbalance, one of the disastrous characteristics of the "agrifood model", as encountered in the dreadful Codex Alimentarius!
... well - lack of clinical study (on cows ... I know it's funny ) - he comes to check the thesis "in the field", where he actually discovers evidence of a postponement of the real causes related to neoproductivism on EM radiation for possible reasons of societal paradigm:
The chronicity and the difficulty of their eradication justify on the part of the breeder to make the right choices as to the measures which are proposed to him and a great perseverance in their implementation. The success is not necessarily immediately at the rendezvous [:]
"When the clinical investigation and the laboratory succeed in characterizing an infection of the farm by the BVD virus, and that vaccination measures are proposed [:]
[-] What if the breeder refuses because he did not believe what was said to him? [:]
[-] What to do for the breeder who fraudulently obtains the necessary drugs without prescription or laboratory examination and does not leave a syndrome MMA in his sows (metritis, mastitis, agalactia).
[-] What to do for the breeder who, when free technical help is offered to him, declares that if a veterinarian comes on his farm he will "take it out with his fork"?
... which brings him to the footnote, where he attempts an explanation on the basis of these clues:
These types of behaviors may have different explanations : because his neighbor or his union will have told him that it is not that, or because a guru or a land manager of the fields - expert or geobiologist - will have told him that he has an electrical problem, or for any other reason escaping the logic, to which must be added an attitude sometimes encountered by certain breeders particularly refractory third parties "put their noses into their affairs" and make judgments about how they work.
... then drifts into an opposite paradigm:
This behavior is completely antithetical to the "social contract" whereby the citizen helps the farmer (indirectly, of course) with subsidies, and the breeder has to work in a transparent way.
The table being planted. We perceive that the author of this evaluation, did his work on the basis of "indices" and possibly deduces that the reaction of the breeder would be the proof of a societal postulate! It's a bit quick ...
The fact remains - at the end of the day - that in either case, the health peak is reached because of the search for optimization at all costs (either on the side of the electrical industry ... . either on the yield side required from breeders). And it is clear that we are in the middle of the case where we are dealing with an "already weakened animal population". It is this point that should be submitted to our sagacity! Indeed, we are no longer at the stage where we see direct and irrefutable effects of EM radiation, but supposed indirect effects, and that in this context, it is suggested de facto, that "healthy animals would not suffer troubles ... "
We are no longer in a scientific demonstration with the EM field as an irrefutable cause, but in a context of placebo / noclebo effect ...
It's like looking for who came first? The egg or the chicken? Is EM radiation contributing to the weakening of the species or is it the weakening of the species that is exposed to EM radiation induces health problems?
If we do not put the cart in front of the horse, let me think that the weakening of the species occurs upstream and that the EM radiation is revealing - just like any external stimuli affecting neurotransmitters already "border line" could have been ...
At the question: "is it dangerous"? The answer is: "it depends for whom"?
At the question: "should we avoid the problem and say that there is no danger"? The answer is: "probably being convinced that it is dangerous is even worse than a possible evil, if at all".
Conclusion: if you are in the latter case, better not expose yourself ...
For others what is the risk? Besides, are we sure that it is harmful? Maybe we could cure ailments with him? It's even already the case ...:
- in cancerology;
- by radiotherapy;
- by light therapy;
... and some others ...
Does this mean that we have to get there? Of course not! We have the choice to develop ITS immune response, which will have the effect of avoiding / delaying any cancer, or even side effects ... And certainly boosting our resistance to all types of effects. Everything is in the "field"! It's a question of dosage ...