Occurrence of detection of EMF by biological systems is necessary to support a conclusion that powerline EMFs affect human health. If it is not also sufficient, what else is needed? There are three possibilities: (1) additional scientific evidence; (2) standardized rules for evaluating the evidence in relationship to the conclusion; (3) consideration of the economic, political, and sociological circumstances within which human subjects are presently exposed to powerline EMFs. I think it is incumbent upon those who deny the sufficiency of detection to come forward with a prescription or analysis regarding what ought to be required in addition to the present evidence so as to provide sufficiency. If additional scientific evidence is needed, what sort of evidence? How is the evidence to be evaluated? With what degree of certainty: should decisions be made by scientists and simply adopted or ratified by Congress or the courts?