I am amazed at the casual dismissal of such fears by NIE, especially in light of a British Medical Journal report highlighting a clear link between overhead power lines and childhood leukaemia (BMJ, Vol. 330, June 4, 2005).

In all spheres of human and animal medicine, there is unanimous agreement that prevention is the best form of cure.

Hence the precautionary principle was enshrined in the treaty of Maastricht.

The UK Government, as a signatory to this treaty, agreed to incorporate this fundamental principle in its decision making processes.

NIE's stance contravenes everything the precautionary principle set out to achieve.

Their arrogant attitude is that, in the absence of absolute proof of health risks, they should be allowed to erect overhead cables, even though under?grounding is a much safer option. The precautionary principle argues that the onus is on NIE to provide proof that high voltage overhead power lines are absolutely safe and, if they cannot, then it is their responsibility to eliminate the hazard or minimise risk. NIE's attitude is all the more disappointing given that several European neighbours have greater commitment to Maastricht.

If NIE value their customers' health and the picturesque Armagh/Tyrone landscape, they will do the decent thing and put the power lines underground.

Belgium and Denmark have already banned the construction of all new overhead high voltage power lines.

NIE simply don't want to spend the cash on under?grounding. Such penny?pinching is unacceptable where health is concerned.

Instead of working up to a standard like the Swedes, the Belgians and the Danes, NIE seem content to work down to a price.

Patrick McGinnity, Veterinary Surgeon, Keady