This is a backup of the savedereel.com website for posterity.

EMR & RFR to 2008

High Frequency Microwave radiation from communications towers

The high frequency pulsed microwave radiation emitted from digital mobile phone communication towers is a major health risk.  They range in size from antennas on buildings, to single pole towers, then up to lattice base stations. The bigger the tower, the more radiation and further it travels to link up to other towers to form a network. New upgrades which started this year to 4G mean even more radiation in the air than previously with 3G or prior to that 2G.  Radio frequency radiation (RFR) at the high level of 4G can travel 30kms or more to link up to other towers as a network. GSM (Global System Mobile Communications) technology is (2G) – analogue was the first mobile technology.

There is now concrete evidence from thousands of world renowned Professors, Scientists, Doctors, Institutions, and Professional Groups who have completed detailed meticulous scientific studies and tests to be able to say with certainty that mobile phone radiation from microwave radiation communications towers is a significant health risk that can cause brain tumours, a wide range of cancers and many other diseases.  It changes the DNA in your body and breaks through the blood brain barrier of your skull to change the molecular structure of your brain. 

Wireless networks operate using this radio frequency radiation (RFR) as do mobile phones.  You can’t see the connections but they are there in the air.  Whatever you can connect to the radiation, it can connect to you.  It can penetrate your body up to 10cms which basically covers all your internal organs, so any types of cancers are possible.  The majority of the population are unaware this is happening to them as their bodies are not sensitive enough to feel the radiation, until it is too late, but there are a minority in the community who are sensitive and can feel it in the early stages. People are at far greater risk than for the smoking or asbestos exposure issues.

The incidence of these brain tumours, cancers and other diseases has grown immensely over recent years, with each year showing statistics per head of population significantly higher than the previous year.

The Chief Executive Officers and spokespersons of Telstra, Optus and any other communications companies will always tell you the radiation is safe and that they have never received any complaints.  That is their job to do – protect their company at all costs, otherwise they would not have a job.  They can never afford to admit to the truth. 
A group of International scientists known as the Venice Resolution signed a document on 6/6/2008 endorsing a precautionary approach to EMR exposure which had been initialled by the International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety work shop in December 2007.  Adverse effects of radiation from communications towers, and other sources were discussed such as electro-hypersensitivity, blood brain barrier changes, learning and behavioural effects, changes in anti-oxidant enzyme activities, DNA damage, bio-chemical mechanisms of interaction, and biological damage.  “As stated in the Benevento Resolution of September 2001, we remain concerned about the effects of human exposure to electromagnetic fields on health”. “As an outcome we are compelled to confirm the existence of non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields on living matter, which occur at every level of investigation from molecular to epidemiological”.  “The non-ionizing radiation protection standards recommended by international standards organizations, and supported by the World Health Organization are inadequate”.  “Existing guidelines are based on results from acute exposure studies where only thermal effects (heating) are considered”. They said,
“We take exception to the claim of the Wireless Communications Industry that there is no credible scientific evidence to conclude there is a risk”.  “Recent epidemiological evidence is stronger than ever before which is further reason to justify precautions”.  “We recognise the growing health problem”. 

The Resolution and list of signatories to it can be found at http://www.icems.eu/does/Venice_Resolution_0608.pdf

ARPANSA - Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency

The Australian Government ARPANSA’s regulation for wireless networks is designed to protect from short term effects caused by massive amounts of radiation heating, but does not protect against non-heating (athermal) effects.  It is the athermal effects of radiation sustained over a longer period of time which have been identified in thousands of research documents that we are not protected from.  Researchers have shown that exposure to athermal radiation on humans can cause genetic and hormonal changes, cancers, leukaemia, brain tumours and reproductive problems.

Both The International Commission for Nonionising Radiation and the Australian standard allow exposure to the public of  two million µW/m2 (microwatts per square meter).  Scientific proof by Dr Gerd Oberfeld from the Austrian Department of Health has shown significant increases of cancer rates over only 10 µW/m2 (microwatts per square meter). This is thousands of times less than the Australian limit for humans.

Up until 2002 the Australian Standard for human exposure was 200µW/cm2 from towers and 417µW/cm2 from mobile phones.  A working group of the Department of Health then brought in new limits which were much higher and now allows people to be exposed to much more microwave radiation from higher frequency 3G phones and towers.

In 2004 ARPANSA which is responsible for radiation health protection in Australia and of which operates under the auspices of the Ministry of Health had a representative attend a public meeting in Bronte, Sydney, to speak to residents who were concerned about the construction of a Hutchison 3G mobile phone antenna and referred to the community as “the enemy”. Note that on 4/8/2004 Telstra purchased 50% of Hutchison’s 3G network for $450 million for the right to share 2,000 base stations.

In 2002 ARPANSA actually increased the Australian Standard of radiation exposure to humans to accommodate more radiation output from communications towers.

ARPANSA was due to put out a revised safety limit for exposure to the public of microwave radiation emitted from Communications towers three years ago.

They had yet another meeting in Melbourne on 27/2/2008 to discuss the reviewing of the Australian Safety Standard for electromagnetic radiation (EMR) exposure but are still no further advanced from a few years ago and still no reductions made to their existing high level.

ARPANSA’s CEO Dr. John Loy’s February 2008 promise of the high1998 Australian standard that doesn’t protect the public being replaced with a standard that provides some safety was to be completed and forwarded to the Radiation Health Committee before the end of 2008 did not happen and is still no further advanced.  Dr John Loy has now left ARPANSA.

There are no Australian safety standards in place to protect the public.  ARPANSA is working in conjunction with input from a broader consultative group of interested stakeholders e.g. mobile phone companies.

ARPANSA appears to be caught in an awkward situation – dammed if they do set an appropriate safe standard for exposure as then the public will see they have already been exposed to high levels of radiation, and dammed if they don’t by keeping a high standard that doesn’t protect the public but does protect the telecommunications industry.

There is no sponsored independent scientific research being done in Australia on microwave radiation exposure.   The Authorities sacked hundreds of scientists between 1997 and 2003 and have taken remaining scientists off these studies. This was because the results that were being produced in the past years by the scientists were not favourable with the outcome the Government wanted. 

The Federal Government is a major beneficiary of the telecommunications industry.  In the 1999-2000 financial year the Government reaped $16.6 million from carriers for annual licence fees and $1,360 million for the sale of spectrum for communication networks. In its May 2000 budget, the government announced that it was intending to balance its budget with the assistance of sales of $2.6 billion of spectrum licences.  With such enormous sums at stake, the Government has been less than enthusiastic to admit risks from EMR or to embrace precautions to protect public health.

In 2008 ARPANSA’s standard for public exposure is now 468µW/cm2  for 935MHz and 900µW/cm2 for 1800MHz antenna output, and some current legislation allows for anything up to 1000µW/cm2 .

The Australian Government does not claim that this ‘standard’ protects public health nor ensures public safety.

International Standards Protection

Radiation standards worldwide protect only against short term exposure.  There are no international standards that protect public health from long term exposure such as occurs near mobile phone antennas.  They do not protect against non-heating (athermal) effects which have been proven in hundreds of scientific studies world wide to cause major health problems and cancers.

In 2006 Dr Orjan Hallberg and Dr Gerd Oberfeld said that existing standards for radiofrequency and microwave radiation are designed to protect the public only from one aspect of effects which is the rise in body temperature. 

They say this is only seen with extremely high radiation intensities. (Dr. Gerd Oberfeld, Public Health Department, Salzburg State Government, Salzburg, Austria and speaker for Environmental Medicine for the Austrian Medical Association, Vienna, Austria.)

In a report to the Austrian Department of Health by Dr. Gerd Oberfeld, showed an increased risk of cancers at only one-one hundred thousandth of the radiation level currently permitted by international standards.  He found the closer people live to the radiation towers, the higher the risk of cancer.  Being exposed at 1,000 µW/m2 (microwatts per square meter) and living within 200 meters of a mobile phone base station increased the cancer risk to 8.5 times the norm for people most exposed.

The World Health Organization  (WHO)

The World Health Organization  (WHO) is an International radiation watchdog.  It was accused by Dr. Keith Baverstock (who was this Organisation’s senior radiation adviser in Europe) of suppressing a report for publication in 2001 on radiation risks which showed that breathing air containing depleted uranium (ionizing radiation) from used weapons caused cancer.  Dr. Baverstock said the wide knowledge of this factor could have prevented many deaths in the recent Iraqi conflicts. Dr. Baverstock also said that “science has been perverted for political ends by government agencies which should be protecting public health”; and “It is sad that the NRPB, which should be an independent body, was complicit.” (Scotland, Sunday Herald 22/2/2004).

In July 2007 the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended precautions for exposure to electromagnetic fields which is associated with an increased risk of childhood leukaemia, but do not give any real directive.
In 2007 the WHO said “there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects”.

The German Institute for Building Biology

The German Institute for Building Biology has updated its’ guidelines for evaluating buildings.  It rates concerns regarding sleeping areas in four categories:  none, slight, severe and extreme.

The above levels of exposure considered severe and extreme are lower than those allowed by international standards.  2008.
Note the guidelines of the International Committee for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection for EMR is a limit of 1,000mG or 100µ/T.  http://www.baubiologic.de/downloads/english/richt,werte_2008_englisch.pdf

Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR)

EMR does occur naturally in the environment in the form of light and the earth’s magnetic field.  Artificial EMR (human formed) differs from natural EMR in frequency and intensity.  Adverse effects can be caused by ‘frequency’ rather than power only.  Electromagnetic radiation is the energy that radiates from any moving electrical current.  It is comprised of both a magnetic and an electric field. Emissions from mobile phones and their antennas are in the radiofrequency (RF) band of the electromagnetic spectrum.  Signals can be pulsed (as in digital communications) or modulated (in which either the frequency or strength of the signal is changed).  Powerlines and electrical appliances operate at a frequency of 50Hz to 60Hz (Hertz).  Mobile phones and phone towers operate at much higher frequencies in the Megahertz region. Electric fields are measured in volts per meter (V/m).

Frequency is the number of wave patterns (cycles) to pass a given point in a second and measured in Hertz at 1 cycle per second (1Hz).  Wavelength for 60Hz of U.S. power system is 5,000km; wavelength of microwave oven (2450 MHz) is 12.2cm.

Ionising radiation is radiation that has the capacity to break covalent chemical bonds including nuclear radiation and Xrays.

Non-ionising radiation is radiation without the capacity to directly break covalent chemical bonds which includes ELF, microwave radiofrequency radiation and visible light.

EMR has been shown scientifically to trigger a response by Heat Shock Proteins, chronic release of HSPs have been shown to cause cancer.  EMR has been shown to breach the blood brain barrier leading to neurodegenerative disease.  It affects the process of calcium ion efflux which affects the neurotransmitter GABA, melatomin, DNA synthesis, cell death, chromosome aberrations, gene transcription, protein expression, immune competence, regulation of the heartbeat, cancer, reproductive and neurological effects.

In the year 2000 the publication report by the eminent medical researcher Sir Richard Doll made the link of EMR and RFR with human disease and was accepted at the highest levels of the scientific community.

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nucleaur Safety Agency (ARPANSA)’s Australian Standard for electromagnetic radiation exposure is now 3,000 mG (milliGauss), (but up to 50,000mG for workers for a few hours per day) a measurement of magnetic field, but scientific proof from the International Agency for Research on cancer has been available now since 2002 and say that only 4mG is carcinogenic to humans and can cause cancers, so Australia does not have safety standards which protect us from harm. They say leukemia survival rates decreased dramatically in Perth, Australia after the introduction of TV, FM radio and other RF transmitters.
Woodcliffe, J & Dougan, L, Cancer Council of W.A.)

The Catania Resolution

An international conference of scientists held on 13 and 14 September 2002 in the City of Catania, Italy.  Research on electromagnetic fields, scientific and legal issues, organized by ISPEL, and the University of Vienna.  It said “We take exemption to arguments suggesting that weak (low intensity) EMF cannot interact with tissue.”  “The weight of evidence calls for preventative strategies based on the precautionary principle.  At times the precautionary principle may involve prudent avoidance and prudent use”. (http://www.emrpolicy.org/regulation/international/docs/catania_resolution.pdf)    2002

The Freiburger Appeal

This statement was released by a group of German physicians in October 2002 endorsing an appeal to the medical community and political authorities to recognize the impacts of communications technologies on health. It linked a range of adverse symptoms and health problems to EMR.  It stated “we can see a clear temporal and spatical correlation between the appearance of disease and exposure to pulsed high-frequency microwave radiation such as installation of a mobile telephone sending station in the near vicinity”.  It also said “On the basis of our daily experiences, we hold the current mobile communications technology (introduced in 1992 and since then globally extensive) and cordless digital telephones (DECT  standard) to be among the fundamental triggers for this fatal development.  They heighten the risk of already-present chemical-physical influences, stress the body’s immune system, and can bring the body’s still-functioning regulatory mechanisms to a halt.  Pregnant women, children, adolescents, elderly and sick people are especially at risk”  they said.

The Benevento Resolution  

The International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS) held an international conference entitled The Precautionary EMF Approach: Rationale, Legislation and Implementation, hosted by the City of Benevento, Italy, on February 22, 23 & 24, 2006. The scientists at the conference endorsed and extended the 2002 Catania Resolution and resolved that more evidence has accumulated suggesting that there are adverse health effects from occupational and public exposures to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields, or EMF, at current exposure levels.  What is needed, but not yet realized, is a comprehensive, independent and transparent examination of the evidence pointing to this emerging, potential public health issue. .  It recommended precautions to reduce exposure to EMR, and stated “We encourage governments to promote alternatives to wireless communications systems e.g. the use of fibre optics and coaxial cables”.  It also stated that “Proposals for city-wide wireless access systems should require public review of potential EMF exposure and, if installed, municipalities should ensure this information is available to all and updated on a timely basis.”

More of the report can be obtained through Elizabeth Kelley, Managing Secretariat, International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS), Montepulciano, Italy.

Email:info@idems.eu,   or  Website: http://www.icems.eu/docs/BeneventoResolution.pdf

The BioInitiative Report

The BioInitiative Report released in August 2007 by a collaboration of International scientists has shown a substantial body of scientific evidence of health problems from electromagnetic fields (ELF), powerlines, appliances, radiofrequency radiation (RFR) from communications technologies including mobile phones, base stations and Wi-Fi technology. “We recommend that wired alternatives to Wi-Fi be implemented, particularly in schools and libraries so that children are not subjected to elevated RF levels”. Co-authors Dr. David Carpenter and Ms Cindy Sage say “Long term and cumulative exposure to such massively increased RF has no precedent in human history”.  “What is clear is that the existing public safety standards limiting these radiation levels in nearly every country of the world look to be thousands of times too lenient”.  “Changes are needed” the report states.  “Good public health planning is needed now to prevent cancers and neurological diseases linked to exposure to powerlines and other sources of EMF”.  “We need to educate people and our decision makers that ‘business as usual’ is unacceptable”.  We recommend that people be exposed to not more than 0.1µ/Wcm2  which is just a ten thousandth of the current standard.  They conclude that “The scientific evidence is sufficient to warrant regulatory action for ELF (extra low frequency radiation) and it is substantial enough to warrant preventative action on RF (radiofrequency radiation including mobile technology”.  They say people who use mobile phones 10 years or more have 200 times more chance of developing a brain tumour on the side of the head against which they hold the phone and that people who use a cordless phone for more than 10 years have 470 times more chance.  The BioInitiative Report scientifically reviewed over 2,000 studies. It stated the scientific evidence is now sufficient to warrant preventative action against EMR and RFR including digital microwave radiation from communications towers.

(Dr. David Carpenter, Director,  Institute for Health and the Environment, University of Albany, New York)
Their in depth lengthy report is on line at http://www.bioinitiative.org  31 August 2007

The European Parliament has acknowledged the risks of electromagnetic radiation and called for stricter safety limits and voted in favour to endorse this. “Parliament is greatly concerned about the Bio-Initiative International Report concerning electromagnetic fields which points to health risks posed by emissions from mobile telephony devices such as mobile telephones, UMTS, Wi-Fi, Wimax and Bluetooth”. It resolved the current exposure limits for EMR are ‘obsolete’ because they “obviously take no account of developments in information and communications technologies, or the recommendations issued by the European Environment Agency on the stricter emission standards that have been adopted by Belgium, Italy and Austria”.  2008.

Dr. John Holt, a leading Australian cancer specialist and founder of the Radiowave Therapy Research Institute has found that EMR creates damage by acting on the body’s system for metabolising food and producing energy.  Anaerobic activity occurs in diseases such as cancer and diabetes which have both increased dramatically in recent years.  Dr. Holt found that people exposed to EMR from electrical and communications technology have high rates of diabetes and says “A world of incurable diabetes is a horrific future”.  2008.

Mobile phone Antennas, Towers and Base Stations

The radiation protection standard for maximum exposure levels for radio frequency fields was set at 3kHz to 300GHz (kilohertz to gigahertz) by ARPANSA in 2002. It provides different limits for different frequencies.  The limits were increased to accommodate the rolling out of Telstra’s ‘3G’ network in October 2006. Previous to this time ARPANSA’s limits would have been too low for the increase in microwave radiation to 3G.  In 2008 Telstra started to rollout the 4G network – more radiation. 
Technology frequency limits are:-  CDMA 800 MHz – 400 µW/cm2    GSM 900 MHz – 450 µW/cm2
(measured in microwatts per square centimeter) GSM 1800 MHz – 900 µW/cm2    3G 1950 MHz – 975 µW/cm2

Analogue operated at 824-894 MHz, GSM (2G) operated at 890-960 MHz, and third generation (3G) operates at 1800-1950 MHz.
Hertz is a measure of frequency (the number of cycles per second), named after Heinrich Hertz, a German physicist who discovered radio waves in 1888.

KiloHertz (KHz) = a thousand Hertz,  Megahertz (MHz) = a million Hertz, 
GigaHertz (GHz) = a thousand million Hertz.   In Australia electricity operates at 50Hz (50 cycles per second).

The old analogue mobile phone system operated using a steady sine wave, but the new digital network utilizes sharp pulses of power – modulated.  This causes our bodies to be subjected to a series of jarring signals of varying intensities, unlike previously with an even regular pattern. A modulation is a change in frequency or strength of the field. A pulsed wave is a modulated wave which has bursts of energy.

There are basically three groups of radiofrequency radiation telecommunications structures.  The smallest is the antennas usually placed on buildings, then towers on a mono pole, then the biggest is on a lattice type structure and called a base station.  The bigger the tower, the more radiation it is capable of emiting. A ‘Spectrum Analyser’ device can measure amounts of microwave radiation emitted from communications towers.  It can be purchased from David Mould at YShield in Hawthorn, Victoria.  (http://www.yshield.com.au)

In 2004 the Salzburg Public Health Office in Austria recommended a maximum exposure level to microwave radiation indoors of  0.0001 µW/cm2  (microwatts per centimeter squared) or 1µW/m2  (microwatt per meter squared).  Advice from Dr. Oberfeld and Dr. Enrique was for levels no higher than 0.02 V/m (volts per meter) for the total sum which is equal to a power density of  0.0001 µW/cm2.

M. Ha from Dankook University, South Korea tested 1928 children with leukemia and 956 with brain cancer.  They found children living within 2kms of radiation towers were at a far greater risk of developing these diseases than children who lived more than 20kms away.

The 3rd International Workshop on biological effects of electromagnetic fields was held from 4th to 8th October 2004 at Kos in Greece.  Findings were presented from studies done prior by Dr. Gerd Oberfeld of the Public Health Department of Salzburg,  Austria and by Dr Navarro Enrique in the town of La Nora near Murcia, Spain in 2003.  They studied effects of two transmitters – a 900GSM and 1800GSM antenna that were located on a hill near residences.  Over the short term they found people had symptoms such as fatigue, irritability, headache, feeling of discomfort, difficulty in concentration, loss of memory, visual disorder, dizziness, and cardiovascular problems.  They said “These effects are symptomatic of ‘microwave sickness’ or ‘radiofrequency syndrome’ which have been reported from exposures in many other studies”.

Dr. O. Hallberg from Sweden also presented evidence at the Workshop that there is a connection between the roll out of GSM mobile technology which operates at 900 to 1800 MHz and a range of health problems including Alzheimers disease.

In early 2003 an Irish farmer John Ryan allowed the construction of a mobile phone tower on his property.  Shortly after it became operational he began experiencing severe symptoms including weakness, and burning of the face, which only subsided when he left his property.  His tragic plight was on the Irish TV Program ‘Ear to the Ground’ on 4/12/2003.  He and his wife then moved out from their house.

Twenty-Five British doctors have spoken out about the potential risks of radiation from mobile phone towers. The doctors submitted a statement in protest to the planned construction of an antenna near several schools at Crosby, and that their views “would also apply to any similarly placed masts”.  The statement reads “On the basis of currently available information, the long term biological effects of mast emissions are unknown.  We feel it is therefore potentially medically unsafe for 02 (the carrier) to transmit radiation from the mast being erected in Cambridge Road, Crosby.  Because this is an avoidable potential risk, we advocate that the mast is removed”.  They also say “a risk should only be taken with the agreement of that person” and “there is a general principle that a potential toxin is properly evaluated before being unleashed on the general public”.  “In installation of this particular mast, both of these principles would appear to have been broken”.  2005.

Professor Grigorjev from the Institute of Biophysics in Moscow and Chairman of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection said there is an entire database of evidence that shows effects from radiation exposure from mobile / wireless communications towers such as effects to the central nervous system, the immune system and the endocrine system.  He said International Standards do not protect against the long term effects of radiation. 19/11/2005.

A group of German doctors represented by Dr. Horst Eger found the rate of newly developing cancer cases was significantly higher (3 times the risk) after five years for those patients living a distance of  400 meters from the cellular transmitters compared to those living further away.

Following the rollout of the Tetra communications system in Britain many people reported health problems around the proximity to the antennas.  2005

In 2006 a new Political Party was established in Sweden to address the issues of mobile phone towers.  The Folkets Vilja (Peoples Will) was established by Donald Forsberg and went to the September 2006 national elections with candidates.  The Party’s stance was that deployment of new wireless technologies be postponed until scientifically proven safe regarding the long term effects on humans and the environment (including animals and birds).  They said “more and more people are getting sick because of the new wireless microwave based communication systems like UMTS and TETRA”. “Many of the affected people can no longer work, some are suffering so badly that they are forced from their homes due to nearby antenna clusters on towers, masts and buildings”.

In Wales on 13/10/2006 the Welsh National Assembly endorsed a report recommending planning approval be required for all mobile phone antennas, towers and base stations.  The report stated “we recommend that the Minister clarifies guidance in line with Planning Policy Wales to ensure that local planning authorities take into account when deliberating on applications for planning permission or prior approval”.  (www.wales.gov.uk)

Residents of Slocan Valley in Vancouver, Canada opposed phone company Telus Corp’s plan to construct a microwave tower in their valley which does not have any mobile phone service.  They planned to use the absence of mobile phones and radiation towers as a draw card for tourists and prospective home owners.
(Reuters 23/7/2007)

In a press release on 27/9/2007 Canada’s Green Party called on their Government to issue a national warning about the risks of mobile phones and wireless networks.  “There is growing scientific evidence that exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from cell phones and wireless networks can cause significant harm to people”.

“There are credible articles from researchers reporting that cell tower –level RF exposure (estimated to be between 0.1 and 0.5µW/cm2 ) produces ill effects in populations living up to several hundred meters from wireless antenna sites.  The DNA strand breaks occur at only 1/40th of the guideline limits.  Hence, UMTS signals are almost ten times as active as GSM signals”. (and this is only for a small antenna)
(Press release, Professor Franz Adlkofer, Verum-Foundation, 6/10/2007). 

Dr Martin Blank of the US wrote to Canada’s Langford Council expressing concerns about the risk of EMR. “There is now sufficient scientific data about the biological effects of EMF, and in particular about radiofrequency radiation, to argue for adoption of precautionary measurers.  We can state unequivocally that EMF can cause single and double stand DNA breakage at exposure levels that are considered safe under the FCC guidelines in the USA”.  Toronto City Council is at least 100 times lower than Health Canada’s safety code 6 limits for the siting of new towers. 11/9/2008

Locating the placing of antennas, towers, and base stations in Australia go to (http://www.aca.gov/au/database/radcomm/index.htm). The list should be updated every three months.

Wireless systems and networks

These operate using radio frequency radiation (RFR) which is beamed out from Communications towers.  You can’t see the connections, but they are there.  Wherever you can connect to it, the radiation can connect to you and penetrate into your body 10cm enabling it to attack your organs and bones. This technology allows people to connect computers to the internet without the use of cables.  They are lined by radiofrequency radiation to a network of base stations / towers.  Telstra turned on what they called ‘3G’ network in October 2006 which emitted more radiation from towers than previously with the 2G. In 2008 the Telecommunications industry is increasing the radiation output capacity of towers and call this 4G. There will then be enough radiation in the air to use wireless systems in most places. 

There is now overwhelming amounts of scientific evidence world wide to show it can cause childhood leukaemia, brain tumours, Alzheimers disease and a wide range of cancer types. It changes the DNA in your body and the molecular structure of your brain.  The majority of the population are unaware this is happening to them as their bodies are not sensitive enough to feel the radiation, but a minority.   People are at far greater risk than for just smoking or asbestos exposure. The majority of the public are unaware until they have the cancer.

Building wireless systems also known as distributed antenna systems consists of a network of small antennas within an office building, connected by RF transmitting cables and it allows workers to operate wireless Wi-Fi technology including mobile phones.  It operates like a network of mobile phone communication base station towers but at lower power.  This equipment generates radiofrequency radiation in addition to the radiation that is now already present in the environment from the microwave communications towers.

Dr. Frederick Gilbert, Biologist and President of Lakehead University in Ontario, Canada refused permission for the installation of wireless Wi-Fi internet services in the campus, but left the existing fibre optic network in place.  Gilbert said he based his decision on scientific evidence indicating potential health risks from long term RF radiation exposure.  He stated “I’m not going to put in place what is a potential chronic exposure for our students”.  28/1/2006 

Health concerns have prompted a back lash against wireless computer networks in some schools in Britain.  Prebendal, Stowe and Ysgol Pantycelyn schools have all removed their wireless networks and replaced them with cabled systems.  This move follows concerns by parents about the radiofrequency radiation emitted by the wireless systems.  (The Times 20/11/2006)

Sir William Stewart from Britain’s Health Protection Agency (HPA) said on the British television program “Panorama” “I believe there is a need for review of the Wi-Fi technology”.  There are fears that the radiofrequency radiation they emit has a harmful effect on people.  Some effects reported were severe headaches, nausea, memory and concentration problems.  2007

Michael Parkin of Britain’s Professional Association of Teachers has written to the Education Secretary calling for a full scientific investigation into the effects of Wi-Fi networks in schools”.  “I have concerns about the health of both pupils and staff”, says Mr Parkin.  “I am concerned that so many wireless networks are being installed in schools and colleges without any understanding of long term consequences”.  Note:  Several British schools have already banned this technology in response to health concerns.
Further experts:-  British MP Dr Ian Gibson has called for an inquiry into the effects of Wi-Fi wireless systems; along with Alasdair Phillips an electrical engineer from the British group Powerwatch; Britain’s Professional Association of Teachers; and  The Austrian Public Health Department have all called for a ban on the installation of wireless networks in schools.  “The data shows a very clear picture of DNA breaks, DNA damage, epidemiological evidence, followed through to increased cancer rates”. 2007

London’s Haringey Council opposed the use of Wi-Fi  wireless computer systems in schools in that region.  The Council meeting resolved to recommend that no new Wi-Fi wireless systems be installed in schools and existing systems be disconnected due to health concerns.  This decision followed a call by Sir William Stewart, Chairman of Britain’s Health Protection Agency for a review of Wi-Fi wireless use in schools. (Independent on 15/7/2007)

Magda Havas, an associate professor from Trent University said “I’m recommending we use wireless systems for essential uses only – for things like police and ambulance services”.

In a press release on 12/10/2007 Britain’s Health Protection Agency (HPA) planned to research the exposures from wireless Wi-Fi and WLAN (wireless local area network) computer networks.

The Mayor of Paris made the decision on 1/12/2007 to have Wi-Fi wireless systems turned off in six French libraries after health problems from their workers.  (Press Release on 3/4/2008).

U.S. National Academy of Science published a 78 page report on health relating to impacts from communications towers.  This research is about potential biological and adverse effects from wireless communication devices.  18/1/2008

The Progressive Librarians Guild wrote “Wireless technology may cause immune dysfunction, increased risk of brain tumours and acoustic neuromas, childhood cancers, breast cancer, Alzheimers disease and genotoxicity”.  “Research also shows that public health standards are inadequate in offering guidance on the use of wireless technologies in community spaces”. The Guild via their professional organizations recommended to create warning signage on risks of Wi-Fi throughout their libraries and to act as a community resource in the public education on wireless technologies”.  (http://libr.org/plg/statement.php16/6/2008)

A two day International conference was held on 8th and 9th September 2008 to address a precautionary approach to wireless communications. The conference organised by the Independent Charity, and the UK Radiation Research Trust included presentations on brain tumour studies, electrical sensitivity, standards, mobile phone antennas, health and the precautionary approach.  Professor Hardell said “We should be taking precautions”.  (Hardell, L et al, Int J Oncol,32(5):1097-103, 2008) also <http://www.radiationresearch.org/conference>

Use of mobile phones

Dr. Charles Teo, a leading brain tumour surgeon in Australia said in 2004 “Tumours are increasing in frequency in the area of the head where mobile phones are held in both children and adults”.

Dr. Kjell Hansson Mild from Sweden National Institute for Working Life led a study which showed heavy mobile phone users have a 240% risk of developing malignant brain tumours.  The study had 2,200 people with cancer and an equal number of controls. (Heavy use was deemed 2,000 hours or about ten years use).  Since these brain tumours usually take a number of years to develop and now that many more people are using mobile phones we are presently only looking at the “tip of the tumourogenic iceberg”.  2004

Dr. Jill Meara of Britain’s Health Protection Agency and Deputy Director of the National Radiation Protection Board warned against the use of mobile phones by children.  She advised parents to examine the evidence about mobile phone radiation.  She said it is likely to be some years before the full effects of the exposure will be fully ascertained.  (Evening Standard, 19/9/06)  http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/publications/

The World Health Organization’s International INTERPHONE project has found increased risk of gliomas and neurinomas in a study on radiation effects contributing to brain tumours.  The international study is underway and comprises 13 countries:-  Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the U.K.  Preliminary results so far are similar to other studies – showing an increased risk of gliomas and neurinomas on the same side of the head as used for mobile phone calls for people who had used mobile phones for ten years or more.  (Hours, M et al, Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 55(5):321-332, 2007), The INTERPHONE update can be found at (http://www.iarc.Fr/ENG/Units/INTERPHONEresultsupdate.pdf)

A study completed by Dr. Siegal Sadetzki and colleagues from Chaim Sheba Medical Centre in Israel was published in the American Journal of Epidemiology. It said that using a mobile phone can increase the risk of tumours of the parotid gland (back of mouth close to the ear) by 50%.  They found these tumours were located on the same side of the head as was used for mobile phones.

A joint study in Denmark and the US found young children who were exposed to mobile phone radiation had behaviour problems which included emotional problems, difficulties interacting with other children and hyperactivity.  H. Divan 7/5/2008.

Dr. Ron Herberman, Director of the University of Pittsburg Cancer Institute said “There are several well designed studies that suggest long term (10 years or more) use of wireless phone devices is associated with a significant increase in the risk for glioblastoma (glioma) which is a very aggressive and fatal brain tumour”.

He said some studies have shown that long term mobile phone users have up to 200% more brain tumours than non users.  The International Expert Panel concluded Electromagnetic fields generated by cell phones should be considered a potential health risk. 2008.

EMC Technologies have tested the amounts of radiation being absorbed by human bodies when each of the following mobile phones were held against the skin:-
Nokia E65 – 3.35 watts per kilo at 1800 MHz and 5.84 watts per kilo at 2100 MHz.
Telstra’s HTC dual Touch 850 was 2.46 and 2.92 watts per kilo
Sony Ericcson W910 was 2.16 watts per kilo

Wearing a mobile phone can expose you up to three times the level of radiation allowed by international standards (which are considered very high by the world’s scientists).

On 25/9/2008 the US Congress heard presentations from five witnesses on the topic of ‘Cell Phone Use and Tumours’.  Evidence was presented to the Domestic Policy subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.  The first witness Mrs. Ellen Marks spoke of her husband’s malignant brain tumour on the side of the head he used his mobile phone for 20 years and up to 30 hours per month.  She described the negative impact on her husband including the negative personality changes and stress on the family and asked Congress to take action “so that others can be spared the devastation that my family has endured”.

David Carpenter, Professor of Environment Health Sciences, and co-author of the Bio-Initiative Report said that the evidence is now sufficient to justify taking precautions. He said “There are literally hundreds of studies that have demonstrated radio frequency radiation causes cancers and brain tumours”.  “The evidence available now poses the frightening strong possibility that we are facing an epidemic of brain cancer and other cancers in the future as a result of the uncontrolled use of cell phones”. 
(http://domesticpolicy.oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2199)

A renowned Singaporean Neurosurgeon  Dr. Keith Goh has spoken out publicly about the tumour risk from mobile phones.  He said he was seeing more malignant brain tumours in his patients and at a younger age. He said  “I think we are at this stage in time just seeing the tip of the iceberg”.  14/8/2008 (Mediacorp)

Dr. Herberman said “If we wait until the human evidence is irrefutable and then act, an extraordinary large number of people will have been exposed to a technology that has never really been shown to be safe”. “Electromagnetic fields generated by cell phones should be considered a potential human health risk”. 2008.

Professor Lennart Hardell an Oncologist from University Hospital in Orebro who has conducted more than six studies on the subject told a London conference that “people who started mobile phone and cordless phone use before the age of 20 had more than a five fold increase in glioma which is now a common type of brain tumour. He reported that analogue, digital and cordless mobile phone users had increased risks of developing acoustic neuromas and astrocytomas types 111 and 1V.  (Hardell, L et al World J Surg Oncol, 4:74, 2006)
This study is published in the January issue of the International Journal of Cancer on line at <http://www.emf.portal.org/viewer.php? 1=e&aid=14460>

The Taiwan Electromagnetic Radiation Hazard Protection and Control Association has called for government warnings to be issued after Lennart Hardell’s announcement that child mobile phone users are five times more likely to develop brain tumours than adults. The Consumer Association of Penang is also calling on the Government to encourage children not to use mobile phones and to warn of the potential dangers of exposure. Taipei Times 8/10/2008,  Star 11/10/20008.

Australia’s top Neurosurgeons

Professor Vini Khurana says “There is a growing and statistically significant body of evidence reporting that brain tumours such as vestibular Schwannoma (acoustic neuroma) and astrocytoma are associated with mobile phone use”. Professor Khurana said, after his 14 month investigation of the science. “There is enough evidence and technology available to warrant Industry and governments alike in taking immediate steps to reduce exposure of consumers to mobile phone-related electromagnetic radiation and to make consumers clearly aware of potential dangers”.  <http://www.brain-surgery.us>

Dr. Charlie Teo spoke out of his concerns about mobile phone risks on ABC’s TV program ‘Enough Rope’.  Dr. Teo told interviewer Andrew Denton “If you look at the science on mobile phones and the link with brain cancer it is quite compelling”.  “There’s an association and the association is quite compelling”.  “I think the scariest thing is that we know that when you give radiation  for cancer to the brain you can develop brain cancer from the radiation so we know that, we know that the radiation causes cancer, but it takes about ten years for it to develop, so we know that EMR electromagnetic radiation is going to take at least ten years to create brain tumours and possibly fifteen or twenty years, so if you look at the literature and just pull out the studies that have followed their patients for more than ten years it becomes really, really compelling, the link”.  15/9/2008 (http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s2364518.htm)

A safe alternative to wireless technology has been found – a fibre optic cable.

Co-inventor Michael Naughton who is a U.S. scientist has invented this wired technology. The tiny cable is about a hundred times thinner than a strand of human hair.  It has the capacity to carry electromagnetic signals at almost 90% of the speed of light.  Co-axial cable is presently in widespread use to carry electromagnetic signals for TV, phone and internet services.  Naughton says this new cable can be used instead of the wireless technologies as it does not increase the user’s exposure to radiofrequency radiation.  (Australian IT 9/1/2007)

A secret industry report compiled in the year 2000 by a German Mobile Telecommunications company

A secret industry report compiled in the year 2000 by a German Mobile Telecommunications company named T-Mobil was released by a T-Mobil employee who turned whistle blower.  He gave it to the British group HESE who published it.  The report sited evidence linking exposure by mobile telecommunications systems to increased risk of cancer, DNA damage, chromosome aberrations, changes to enzymes, changes in brain, interruption of cell cycle and cellular communication, debilitation of the immune system and changes to the central nervous system. “A multitude of studies found the type of damage from high frequency electromagnetic fields which is important for cancer initiation and cancer promotion” said the author.  T-Mobil’s report found that these effects from mobile telecommunications were proven and for levels of radiation far below those currently permitted by International Standards.  (see copy of the two page Ecolog report findings attached).
An English translation of the report can be found at http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/ecolog2000pdf

Telstra - ‘Bad for Business’

Telstra has admitted that a link between electromagnetic radiation and health problems could ‘negatively affect’ its business.  In its 2004 Annual Report, Innovation Everywhere, Telstra states:-
“While to date we have been able to obtain limited insurance against these risks, the preparedness of insurers to give this type of insurance cover is reducing and even this limited insurance cover may not continue to be economically viable.  There is a risk therefore that an actual or perceived health risk associated with mobile telecommunications equipment and facilities could:
(a)   lead to litigation against us
(b)   adversely affect us by reducing the number or the growth rate of mobile telecommunications services or
lowering usage per customer
(c)   precipitate the imposition  of more onerous applicable legal requirements which are more difficult or
costly to comply with, or
(d)   hinder us in installing new mobile telecommunications equipment and facilities.
Any of these, or a combination of more than one could have a negative effect on our results or financial position.”

Further Research by Scientists from around the world:-   only a small number listed here

0.2-8µW/cm2  - leukemia (Hocking, Med J Aust, 165(11-12):601-5,1996)
c 7µW/cm2   - increases in leukemia and lymphoma, (Szmigielski, Sci Total Environ, 180(1):9-17, 1996)
1-2µW/cm2 – cancer, chromosome and blood cell changes, miscarriage, nervous system effects (Goldsmith, Int J Occup Environ Health 1(1):47-57, 1995)
c 0.5µW/cm2 -increased rate of miscarriages (Ouellet-Hellstrom, Am J Epidemiol 138(10):775-86, 1993)
0.2µW/cm2 – discomfort, irritability, appetite loss, fatigue, headache, difficulty in concentrating, and
sleep disturbances (Navarro, Biology and Medicine 22(2&3):161-9, 2003)
0.0008-0.41µW/cm2 - effects on memory, attention, reaction, endurance (Kolodynski Sci Total Environ
180:87-93, 1996)

            note:   0.1 mT = 1000mG,    1µT = 10mG  
T = Tesla – an alternative measurement of magnetic field, millitesla (mT) and microtesla (µT).
The International Commission for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)’s safe level for human
exposure is 100µT (1,000mG)
note:   Hz = Hertz – a measurement of frequency (cycles per second),   Megahertz (MHz) million Hz,
Gigahertz (GHz) thousand-million hertz,  (kHz) kilohertz,  (kV) kilovolts.

As from 1/7/2007 Sweden’s Institute of Working Life will no longer receive Government funding for it’s research so will cease operation.  Mr Mikael Sjoberg said the Institute has conducted m)any significant studies and findings into electromagnetic radiation.  16/6/2006. (http://www.arbetslivsinstitutet.se/articles/061016.asp

Population Studies

France 2002.  A study by the French National Institute of Applied Sciences found that in the short term people living closer to mobile phone antennas experienced more adverse effects:-
Living 100 meters from an antenna – irritability, depression, concentration problems, memory loss, dizziness, reduced libido.
Living 100-200 meters from an antenna – headaches, sleep problems, discomfort, skin problems.
Living 200-300 meters from an antenna – a high rate of fatigue
(Santini, Pathol Biol 50:369-373, 2002)

Spain 2003.  People exposed to radiation from a mobile phone antenna at La Nora (operating at 1800 MHz) had discomfort, irritability, appetite loss, fatigue, headaches, difficulties concentrating and sleep disturbances.
(Navarro, E et al, Electromagnetic Biology and Med 22(2):161-9, 2003)

Spain 2004.  A follow up study found that most people exposed in Murcia had a higher incidence of fatigue, irritability, headaches, nausea, loss of appetite, sleeping disorders, depression, discomfort, difficulties concentrating, memory loss, visual disorders, dizziness, and cardiovascular problems.  They recommended a maximum exposure of 0.0001 µW/cm2 .  (Bortkiewicz, A et al, Med Pr,55(4):345-51,2004)

Poland 2005.  A study of people living near mobile phone antennas reported symptoms “mostly of the circulatory system, but also of sleep disturbances, irritability, depression, blurred vision, concentration difficulties, nausea, lack of appetite, headache and vertigo”.  The symptoms were observed whether or not the subject was aware of the presence of the phone antenna.
There are many more countries listed with similar results.

Risk of Type 2 Diabetes

Breast cancer and other clusters

Breast cancer and brain tumour clusters are on the increase. 

The State of the Evidence Report can be found at www.breastcancerfund.org

      (BioInitiative Report, 2007, http://www.bioinitiative.org)

Leukaemia

Alzheimers Disease

M. Feychting found people in occupations exposed to high fields had 2.4 times the risk of Alzheimers and 3.3 times the risk of dementia. (Feychting, M. et al, ‘Dementia and Occupational Exposure to Magnetic Fields’, Scand. J. Work Environ. Health, vol. 24, no. 1, pp46-53, February 1998.)

C. Johansen, and J.H. Olsen found Danish electrical utilities workers had double the risk of senile dementia and motor neuron diseases. 
(Johansen, C. and Olsen, J.H., ‘Mortality from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Other Chronic Disorders, and Electric Shocks Among Utility Workers’, Am. J. Epidemiol., vol. 148, no. 4, pp.362-8, August 15, 1998)

M. Arns with researchers from Netherlands, U.K. and Australia investigated long term effects of mobile phone use on brain function.  They found frequent users showed slower brain activity in the delta and theta frequencies, which is also found in Alzheimers disease.  The average length of time for these mobile phone users was only an average of  2years 4months.  M. Arns suggests longer times will show more severe effects.  (Arns, M et al, International Journal of Neuroscience, 117(9):1341-1360, 2007)

Autism

Tamara Mariea and George Carlo from the U.S. have presented the first clinical data to link wireless technology related EMR in the environment to Autism.  Autism has increased rapidly in recent years and now affects one in every 100 children.  They say EMR inhibits the release of heavy metals from the body.  The treatment of autism is about facilitating detoxing of the body of heavy metals. 
(Mariea, T and Carlo, G,J Aust Coll Nutr and Env Med 28(2):3-7, 2007).

Electro-hypersensitivity (EHS)

Electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) is on the rise according to Joerg Schrottner and Norbert Leitgeb from Graz University in Austria.  They compared their results from Leitgeb’s 1994 study on EHS and found the incidence of people’s EHS had significantly increased.  People complained of sleep disturbances, migranes, nervousness, tinnitus, sore areas around the eyes, burning of the face and inability to concentrate.

Dr. Olle Johansson told a London conference on the 8th and 9th September 2008 “Society must recognise the right of the electrically hypersensitive to have an equal life in a society based on equality”.  “There are 290,000 people with EHS in Sweden alone where this condition is officially recognised as a disability”.  “Many of them have a living hell” he said.  (Assoc. Prof. The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm).

Property Values fall near towers

A jury in the 295TH Judicial District Court of Harris County Texas awarded $1.2 million to a couple who claims that a 100 foot mobile phone tower invaded their privacy and created a nuisance.  The damages payment included compensation for loss of use and enjoyment of the couple’s property, mental anguish, and legal fees.  (Houston Business Journal 25/2/1999).

A study at Lookout Mountain, Colorado in the US found that property values declined associated with the perceived medical harm from a proposed high definition television broadcast antenna.  The author wrote: ‘The perception of reality is that living within a five mile radius and having a direct line of sight of a high-definition television antenna can cause medical harm to human beings.  This perception may not be based on medical or scientific fact but causes concerns within the community.  This perception of reality makes property within the effected zones less attractive to both existing occupants as well as prospective new buyers’. (Hutchison 1999).

In Ireland, a valuation of properties nearest a mobile phone mast found that ‘they had fallen by around 25 per cent’.  (Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd. 15/1/1999).

In Germany, the monthly rent of an apartment was reduced by 20 per cent because mobile phone antennas had been installed on its roof without notification and agreement of the tenant. (Amtsgericht München 27/3/1998).

In Australia a beautiful home in Queensland located close to a tall mobile phone base station took three years to sell and finally sold for much less than the original market value.

At the Senate Inquiry into Telecommunications Legislation in 1997, the three carriers then in operation, Telstra, Optus and Vodafone all admitted that mobile phone towers made a ‘small’ impact on property values.
(Hansard Australia 14/2/1997).

Global warming

Flat screen TVs contribute to global warming by nitrogen trifluoride which is 17,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide and yet is not covered by the Kyoto Protocol of 1977 because if was not in use at that time.
(New Scientist 2/7/2008).

A report from the UK said as people use computers and digital TVs more they are contributing to global warming compared to listening to a conventional radio.  A fifth of the population listening to radio through a digital TV or computer for just two hours a week generates a massive 192,000 more tonnes of CO2 each year than listening to a radio for two hours a week.  The recent study predicts that the use of digital and new technologies may increase electricity consumption by 60% by the year 2010.  (Guardian, 13/11/2006)

The Precautionary Principle

Similar to the policy of prudent avoidance, the precautionary principle is an approach to reducing risks that is usually applied to telecommunications equipment and infrastructure.  It is based on the position that it is not necessary to have definite scientific proof that a human activity such as installing EMR-emitting technology causes particular effect such as health problems in order to justify taking precautions.

The Precautionary Principle was recognized at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, and included Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration which reads:  ‘In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach should be widely applied by States according to their capabilities.  Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific uncertainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measurers to prevent environment degradation’.  This principle was later included in Australia’s Inter-government Agreement on the Environment. (p.25).

The NSW Minister for Education and Training stated in Parliament that there should be a 500 meter buffer zone around schools.  ‘The Department of School Education objects to the installation of mobile phone towers near schools, and that normally means within a radius of 500 meters.  This objection is based on a policy of prudent avoidance’.  (Hansard 22/10/1997).

In March 2000 Sydney’s Royal North Shore Hospital made headlines around the country when it introduced a landmark directive on mobile phone use.  It advised the use of a landline phone or pager in preference to a mobile phone, and suggested that staff who choose to use mobiles hold them at a distance of three to four centimeters from the head.  It further suggested that mobile phones be used in the open or near a window to obtain a clear signal without having to increase power, and advised staff not to use a mobile phone when driving unless they had a hands-free facility in a car fitted with an external aerial. 

In Britain, the Public and Commercial Services Union took the precedent setting stand of advising its 266,000 members to stop using mobile phones so as to protect their heath, with the message, ‘don’t gamble with your health’, the union stated that members must not be forced to carry or use a mobile phone. It also recommended that:  phone charge cards be provided to staff; workers requiring a mobile while traveling leave the devices turned off for the majority of the time; incoming calls be acknowledged and returned later from a land line; mobiles not be carried next to the body when operational; mobiles be kept centimeters away from the head during calls (Sunday Mirror 19/3/2000.)

In July 2000 UK education secretary David Blunkett sent guidelines to every school in England to discourage the use of mobile phones by children under 16.  His letter stated, ‘Children aged 15 and under are likely to be more vulnerable to any unrecognized health risks from mobile phone use than are adults because their nervous systems are still developing’

In December 2000 the UK’s Department of Health released two leaflets containing precautionary recommendations which were sent to stores to be distributed with pre-Christmas purchases of mobile phones.  The first, entitled ‘Mobile Phones and Health’, suggested ways of limiting exposure, in line with the recommendations of the Stewart report. 

Adopting a precautionary approach to the siting of mobile phone base stations may be essential if councils, property owners, and industry are to avoid future compensation claims. 2000

Dr Gary Smith, Principal Environmental Scientist at Sutherland Shire Council and former cancer researcher at NSW University recommended that mobile phone base stations be installed no closer than 300 meters from sensitive areas unless exposure levels could be guaranteed to be less than 0.2µW/cm2 .  This policy was widely emulated by councils and council organizations throughout Australia.  The NSW Local Government Association introduced policies recommending buffer zones extending to 500 meters. 

Precautions taken by other countries

The New Zealand Ministry of Education prohibited the construction of base stations in schools in 1996. Also New Zealand’s Christchurch Council introduced a limit on EMR exposure for the public from mobile phone base stations of 2µW/cm2 which is 1/100th of the country’s standard and has been recognized in law.
McIntyre V Bell, South New Zealand Environment Court (A96/15 NZPT1996).

In 1998 at the Symposium Mobile Phones and Health in Vienna leading international scientists endorsed the following statement: “The participants agreed that biological effects from low-intensive exposure are scientifically established”.

The Stewart Report  In May 2000 an independent panel of 12 eminent biological research scientist, chaired by Sir William Stewart from Britain, released a report which recommended precautions to the siting and use of mobile phone towers.  The report said “if science has greater power to do good, it also has greater power to do harm.  They (The Committee) therefore advocate a precautionary approach to new technology where there are uncertainties about the associated risks”. A list of recommendations followed. (Watt’s the Buzz?)

In 2000 Britain’s Department of Health provided phone retailers with leaflets suggesting ways of limiting exposure.  Also in the year 2000 Britain’s Public and Commercial Services Union advised its’ 260,000 members to stop using mobile phones and recommended various precautions.

In 2000 the German Academy of Pediatrics issued a statement encouraging parents to reduce children’s use of mobile phones.

In 2000 Sydney’s Royal North Shore Hospital advised precautions for mobile phone use, telling people to use a land line instead.

In Salzburg, Austria the maximum indoor exposure guidelines of radio\frequency radiation and microwave radiation is 1µW/m2  made in 2002.

The Vienna Chamber of Medical Practitioners issued guidelines for restricting exposure to radiation from mobile phones.  It said “Use only wired connections for Internet.  UMTS and WLAN lead to high radiation exposures”.  (http://www.nekwien.ot.at  5/8/2005)
(Hallberg, D and Oberfeld, G, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine 25:189-191, 2006)

The Austrian Department of Public Health in Salzburg issued a letter to all schools in it’s jurisdiction advising against the installation of wireless technology.  “The signal seems to be very biologically active. The symptoms seen so far are the same seen in base station studies i.e. headaches, concentration difficulty, restlessness, memory problems, etc.” he said.  5/12/2005

The Greek Minister of Education signed a bill prohibiting the construction of mobile phone antennas and high voltage powerlines within 500 meters of schools.  (World News 24/10/2006)

In 2007 the Austrian Department of Public Health called for a ban on the installation of wireless networks in schools. “If you go into the data you can see a very, very clear picture.  It’s like a puzzle and everything fits well together from DNA breaks, DNA damage, up to animal studies and up to the epidemiological evidence that shows, for example, increased symptoms as well as increased cancer rates” he said. 2007.

In Belgium 30 paediatricians have signed a petition calling for a ban on mobile phone use by under 16 year olds as a result of mounting evidence of health risks in recent research.  (Het Laatste Nieuws 13/3/2007)

Tom Parlon from The Office of Public Works in Ireland ordered a halt to the installation of mobile phone towers following widespread public protests over concerns about potential health effects of radiation.  Among them were 500 government workers who threatened to strike if antennas were activated on their buildings.

Switzerland introduced limits that reduce exposure to 4µW/cm2  which is many times below international limits.
Russia has an exposure limit of 10µW/cm2 .  Italy has stricter limits for public exposure but not for workers.  
Christchurch, N.Z. introduced an exposure limit of 2µW/cm2  which is only 1/100th of the country’s standard.
Canada’s Public Health Authority recommended that public exposure from base stations be reduced to
6-10µW/cm2 .

In 2006 the German Building Biology Institute Neubeurn produced guidelines for sleeping areas.  It recommended the following limits for sleep places:-
(a)    50Hz electric fields: 1 - 5V/m (compared to International guidelines of 5,000V/m for the general public).
(b)    50Hz magnetic fields: 0.2 – 1mG (compared to International guidelines of 1,000mG for general public).
(c)    Pulsed radiofrequency radiation:  0.1 – 5 µW/m2  (compared to 1nternational guidelines of 95,000 µW/m2) for general public).

Health concerns prompted two hundred residents of NeveHoresh in Israel to destroy a mobile phone antenna mounted on a house in their town.  They had appealed to the owner of the house and local council to demolish it but with no results so they marched on the house and destroyed the antenna and equipment (Maariv, 29/6/2006)

In 2006 a group of German doctors lobbied their Federal Government to reconsider plans to auction wireless frequencies.  They had observed symptoms in their patients that resembled reports of microwave sickness.  Their statement read. “We are writing to you as medical doctors who have an obligation towards maintaining the well being of the patients”.

The British Environment Minister Freddie Cohen has called for further research into the effects of radiation from mobile phone antennas and will require phone companies to pay for it.  His announcement was made on 23/4/2007 as the Press reported cancer clusters around mobile phone antennas in the U.K.  The evidence was collected by members of the public and compiled by scientist Dr. John Walker.

The Isle of Man’s Public Works Committee has banned the construction of any mobile phone towers / antennas on property it owns.  It states “the health of the public is too important to taken any chances”. BBC News 8/6/2007

On 17/9/2007 the European Union’s top scientific body has called for a precautionary approach to electromagnetic radiation exposure.

The German Federal Government recommends keeping the personal radiation exposure from high frequency electromagnetic fields as low as possible by using conventional wired connections, if the use of wireless-supported technology can be avoided.   In December 2007 the Government recommended that “in view of the regulatory limits supplementary precautionary measures such as wired cable alternatives are to be preferred to the wireless WLAN system”.

The Mayor of Paris made a decision to turn off Wi-Fi networks in six French Libraries following health problems among workers such as headaches, sore eyes and muscles, dizziness and vertigo after Wi-Fi systems were installed in their Libraries. (http://bibliothequesen/utte.wordpress.com/2007/12/01moratoire-sur-le-wifi-dans-les-bibliotheques-parisiennes/).

London’s Haringey Council recommended that no new Wi-Fi systems be installed in schools and that existing systems be disconnected because of the risk to children’s health.  (Independent 15/7/2007)

The Canadian Greens released a press statement in 2007 saying “There is growing scientific evidence that exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from cell phones and wireless networks can cause significant harm to people, especially children” said party leader Elizabeth May.  (Party Press Release 27/9/2007)
 
The French Government has recommended a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phones as stated by
The Ministry of Health, Youth and Sports on 2/1/08.  They said precautions to reduce exposure should be taken.   (Reuters 3/1/2008)

Officials in the French city of Lyon have agreed to remove a mobile phone tower near the Victor-Hugo school following health problems of students since the installation.  The officials of this city have also agreed to turn off mobile phone towers near three other schools.  (Le Progress 2/2/2008)

The German Federal Government recommends in general keeping the personal radiation exposure from high frequency electromagnetic fields as low as possible, that is to say to prefer conventional wired connectors, if the use of wireless supported solutions can be avoided”. 
(German Environment Ministry in questions to parliament, September 2007)

Carmarthen Shire County Council in Wales has noted to draw up a code of practice on the use of Wi-Fi in schools as the Council admitted to being “very concerned” about potential effects.  (http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/wales). 2007

The Director of the University of Pittsburg Cancer Institute Dr. Ronald Heberman has warned its’ 3,000 staff to take precautions when using mobile phones. He said “I am convinced that there is sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share precautionary advice on cell phone use”.  Dr. Heberman referred to precautions recommended by France, German and India for reducing human exposure to electromagnetic radiation. 2007

The French National Library has issued a press release advising that it will replace Wi-Fi computer connections with safe wired connections.  The decision follows action by unions after workers complained of health problems when the Wi-Fi network was installed.  The Union has called for politicians and officials to “reconsider the massive and systematic use of Wi-Fi and replace it by wired connections”.  Workers in other libraries have now petitioned for the removal of their Wi-Fi systems. 
(Press Release, Bioliotheque nationale de France, 3/4/2008).

The Russian National Committee on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection said there is substantial evidence that mobile phone radiation represents a health risk including high nervous activity in the brain causing behaviour and thinking problems.  The RNCNIRP’s statement has been sent to Mr. Gennady Onishenko requesting the Government implement health warnings on the use of mobile phones.

Britain’s Health Protection Agency (HPA) announced plans to “undertake a research project to measure exposures to radio signals from wireless computers (Wi-Fi and WLAN) networks”.  The announcement follows widely publicized concerns about safety from wireless technology and recommendations by Agency Chairman, Sir William Stewart for an inquiry into Wi-Fi. He said “People using Wi-Fi or in proximity to Wi-Fi equipment are exposed to the radio signals emitted from it and will absorb some of the transmitted energy”.
(HPA press release, 12/10/2007).

The City of Toronto’s Public Health spokesperson Loren Vanderlinden prepared a report to encourage the public to reduce their exposure to radiofrequency radiation (emitted from Communications Towers) and to use landline phones, instead of mobile phones.  Canada, 2008

The Israeli Ministry of Health has issued guidelines for reducing the public’s exposure to mobile phone radiation and to encourage them to use wired connections rather than wireless.  Dr. Siegal Sadetzki, 2008.

The Indian Government has introduced guidelines to reduce public exposure from EMR and telecommunications towers.  (Economic Times 11/6/2008).

Mr. Boneventure Baya, Director General of the National Environment Management Council through the Tanzanian Government implemented new rules that required mobile phone companies conduct environmental audits before constructing antennas.  This move follows public complaints about safety of mobile phone antennas.  (Daily News 19/8/2008).

The Belgium Government Minister for Consumer Protection, Paul Magnette, supported MP Valerie Deom’s call to protect children from marketing of mobile phones and using them.  This follows plans from phone companies ‘Disney’ and ‘Belgacon’ to introduce mobile phones for children.  (Le Soir 6/11/2008).

On 4th November 2008 the New Zealand Greens Party released a policy on EMR calling for a restriction on the construction of mobile phone antennas near schools and child care centres, and for a totally independent review of the New Zealand standards on EMF exposures.  Health spokesperson Sue Kedgley said “As more and more evidence emerges about the potential adverse health effects of low level exposure to EMF, the Government must take a precautionary approach and offer protection to residents who don’t want to be exposed to EMF”.  (http://www.voxy.com.nz/politics/greens-no-cell-towers-near-schoolspreschools/5/5030)  2008

The Irish Association of Teachers and Lecturers’ briefing paper on Wi-Fi states “The ATL believes that it is incumbent upon the Government to quickly address the concerns of our members, of parents, and of society at large”.  They requested an investigation which takes into consideration biological and thermal effects, and for the results to be made public. (ATL “Briefing Paper on the use of WiFi in schools”) 2008.

The Vienna Chamber of Medical Practitioners in Austria issued guidelines for restricting exposure to radiation, particularly from mobile phones.  It said “Use wired connections only for the Internet”. “ UMTS and WLAN lead to high radiation exposures”.  2008.

Lakeland University in Canada has adopted a precautionary policy to restrict the use of Wi-Fi technology on campus.  It states “There will be no use of Wi-Fi in those areas of the university already served by hard wired connectivity”.  The University President Fred Gilbert said “There are now so many re-reviewed studies demonstrating biological effects that it is difficult to imagine that there are not negative health effects”.  (http://magazine.lakeheadu.ca/page.php?p=81&i=10)   2008.

Sir William Stewart, Chairman of Britain’s Health Protection agency, called for a review of Wi-Fi on the British program ‘Panorama’.  He said “There was evidence that such devices could impact on health”.  2008.

Dr. Martin Blank from US has written to Canada’s Langford Council expressing concerns about the risks of EMR.  “There is now sufficient scientific data about the biological effects of EMF, and in particular about radio frequency radiation to urge for adoption of precautionary measurers”.  “We can state unequivocally that EMF can cause single and double strand DNA breakage at exposure levels that are considered safe under the FCC guidelines in the USA”.  11/10/08.

Australia’s response to public concerns

In 1997 the Department of Communications conducted an expensive PR campaign around the country with a focus on the denigration of Drs. Bruce Hocking and Neil Cherry, both of whom had shortly beforehand presented evidence of harmful effects from EMR.  To add further insult, this project was financed from the government’s $4.5 million allocation for research and public education.
On 5th March 1997, communications minister Senator Alston delivered an extremely colourful tirade against visiting New Zealand physicist and university lecturer Dr. Cherry, a renowned biophysicist, meteorologist, and international speaker on EMR.  Under parliamentary privilege, Alston claimed ‘this bloke is a charlatan.  His biographical details start off with mindless and irrelevant gobbledygook.  This man is a rabid populist and totally uninterested in any considered scientific debate.  His remarks are highly inflammatory.  He is a snake oil merchant’. (Hansard 5/3/1997).

The two Australian Councils that have contributed are Sydney’s Sutherland Shire Council and Melbourne’s Moreland Council.  Sutherland Shire developed Australia’s first policy on the siting of mobile phone towers, a policy that was adopted by many other councils and which has enjoyed the confidence of the public and the cooperation of the carriers. Sutherland Shire Council Local Guideline for siting Microwave Base Stations from January 1997 was at least 300meters from any residence, childcare centre, hospital, and aged care centre unless an average exposure at any of these is less than 0.20 +/-0.02µW/cm2  and for dwellings, boarding houses, and residential land unless annual average exposure is less than 0.20 +/- 0.02mW/cm2  .
It states Industrial zones are the preferred location for base stations.
Moreland Council devised a thorough and well-researched strategy in September 1998 on reducing public exposure, primarily to fields from power sources.  It recommended that field in its jurisdiction be reduced to 2mG.  The 2mG limit was chosen as it is the lowest practical field strength achievable, and the lowest level at which health effects have been associated with EMFs.  Moreland Council noted the recommendations of the NSW Gibbs Inquiry, the Victorian Powerline Review Panel and other research findings, and recommended adopting ‘prudent avoidance’ as a guiding philosophy in all electricity and radio-communications infrastructure planning.  It recommended a limit of radiation ambient power flux density in general public areas of the city, and world locations, not exceed an average of 2 microwatts per square centimeter (µW/cm2 ).

The Chair of the Senate Inquiry on EMR recommended in 2001, “that based on a growing body of research that provides evidence of biological effects, the Commonwealth Government considers developing material to advise parents and children of the potential risks associated with mobile phone use”.  (Recommendation 2.3)

In 2004 the Australian Federal Government (liberal party) responded to community concerns on EMR and microwave radiation by the launch of ‘EME Awareness Campaign’ which was designed to allay public concerns, but not to look into the problems as did many other governments.  However, the Shadow Minister for Communications at the time Lindsay Tanner did compare the radiation from mobile phone towers to the asbestos problem.

The Department of Education and Training in N.S.W. made a policy in 2004 of prudent avoidance regarding the placing of mobile phone towers within government schools and the vicinity thereof.  Under the policy any proposal to locate a mobile phone tower within a radius of 500 meters of a government school will not be supported.  The Department requested mobile phone companies to select an alternative site for mobile phone towers away from government schools.

Australian Labor MP Kate Ellis from Adelaide said when speaking to Parliament on 17/9/2007 that mobile phone towers must be more tightly regulated, and that an audit of the health of people living near antennas is required. (Telecommunications (Amendment) Bill 2007, first reading 17/9/07).

The Australian Democrats released a report suggesting that certain diseases are linked to microwave radiation from communications equipment.  The report had found rises in rates of cancers, diabetes, asthma, allergies and Alzheimers disease.  Party leader Senator Lyn Allison went on to say even though there are often multiple causes of illness, the only new environmental factor over the past 15 years that coincides with these big increases in disease is electromagnetic and microwave radiation from wireless communications equipment.
(Media Release 7/12/2007).

Australia’s Local Government Association of New South Wales passed a resolution about mobile phone towers at its annual conference in October 2006.  Holroyd Council proposed “that the Local Government Association of NSW through its representation on the Australian Local Government Association expressed deep concerns to the Federal Government regarding the proliferation of telecommunications towers and associated co-locations”. The Council further proposed “that the Association calls for a Commonwealth Parliamentary Inquiry into whether the current Australian exposure limits for the emission of radiofrequency EMR are set too high for public safety and to assess the non-thermal effects of non-ionizing radiation absorption”.
(http://www.lgsa.org.au/www/html/1419-31-october-2006 asp?intSiteID=1)

A motion by Leichhardt Council recommended “that the Local Government Association take legal advice on the viability of a class action arguing the precautionary principle on the grounds of perceived or real risks to health.  Should the advice be to proceed with such a case, that the Local Government Association Executive calls on all its members to jointly fund it”.

John Patterson a former telecommunications technician

John Patterson a former telecommunications technician was one of the original instigators who set up this digital technology.  He successfully secured the deconstruction of six mobile phone towers in Sydney’s west after he was sacked due to submitting an OH&S report stating how dangerous the microwave radiation is.  John used a friend’s army tank to ram the phone tower’s infrastructure to decommission the towers creating an estimated six million dollars damage   (The Age, 16/7/2007).  (Read his three page report – ‘Inconvenient Truth’)

Channel 7 ‘Today / Tonight Program on Friday 19/9/08 had a program advising the public on the dangers of being exposed to radiation from communications towers, their health and wellbeing.

On 12th November 2008 the Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bio-effects Research ACRBR presented a forum entitled ‘Unplugged and Uncertain’ at Melbourne’s Swinbourne University.  It addressed recent devices and in-building networks.  Professor Bruce Armstrong said that there were increased risks of the gliomas (brain tumour) on the same side of the head as used for mobile phone calls which is cause for concern.  The lengthy report can be found on http://www.emraustralia.com.au   - in the magazine issues.

Mobile phone / wireless - tower approval

Council approval is required for a microwave radiation tower if it is not considered ‘low impact’. 
This is a term made up by Telstra which gives the wrong impression.  These words ‘low impact’ only mean the tower is low sited off the ground – no higher than about 5 meters and normally placed on roofs of buildings. ‘Low impact’ does not mean low radiation. The amount of radiation emitted from these towers has no bearing whatsoever to the name Telstra gave it - ‘low impact’.
If Telstra or another carrier is given approval to erect an antenna /tower/base station, they then have future rights to enter that property when they wish under ‘maintenance’, and can also add to the tower more masts and higher amounts of radiation without requiring any more approvals or anyone knowing about it.

The NSW Cancer Council has chosen to relocate a major fundraising event from Rofe Park sports oval in Hornsby, Sydney which has been home to this event for six years.  This is because of Telstra’s decision to construct a mobile phone tower at that site and follows a special board meeting of the Cancer Council’s ‘Relay for Life’. Hornsby Advocate 28/8/2008.

The Electoral voting leaflet of Hornsby Council Mayoral candidate Andrew Isaac used the issue of radiofrequency radiation as a vote catcher.  He said “I will implement a policy for the safe siting of mobile phone towers and will work to pressure the state government to buy overhead powerlines”.  13/9/2008.

A TV current affairs program in 2008 showed how 30 houses around the Hawthorn suburb in Melbourne’s inner east had purchased special paint only obtainable from Germany to paint their houses. The paint cost $200 per litre and is able to stop the penetration of the radiation from the nearby microwave radiation communications towers. 
This German company is called YSHIELD EMR-Protection, Gewerbering 6, 94060 Pocking, GERMANY.
Phone:- 0049-8531-31713-8,  Fax:- 0049-8531-31713-5,  Email: contact@yshield.com.
The Company also sells cloth material at approx. $300 per meter which can be made into clothes, put up at windows etc.and stops the radiation from penetrating.

The Question - Who will be at risk from future legal claims?

UK lawyer Mr Alan Meyer from England has stated how Councils can be held legally liable for approving the placement of radiation towers. He replied to the question asked that the following are at risk:

(Alan Meyer, ‘Mobile Phones and Mobile Phone Networks Potential Litigation or Law Suits’, presented at Gothenburg conference on Mobile Phones, September 1999).

An Australian leading insurance company Merchantile Mutual

An Australian leading insurance company Merchantile Mutual did not wish to take the risk of future compensation claims when in 1997 Vodafone workmen arrived to install antennas on the insurer’s building. Company officials refused them entrance.  According to a company spokesman, ‘The risk to health may expose us as owners of the property to liability for injury to persons who are or who are alleged to have been exposed to emissions from the base station. The amount of such claims is impossible to calculate’.  In a letter to Vodafone, who planned to erect a tower on the roof of one of Merchantile Mutual’s Sydney offices, located in a densely populated area, the insurance company said “there is an increasing body of scientific and medical evidence of risk to health posed by exposure to emissions from telecommunications base stations”.  “Accordingly, in the view of the potential health risks, the location of a base station on the property would expose an unacceptably large number of people to electromagnetic energy and emissions”.  “The risk to health may expose us as owners of the property to liability for injury to persons who are or who are alleged to have been exposed to emissions from the base station.  The amount of such claims is impossible to calculate”.
(NSW Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Legal Clearing House for public interest legal matters – reported in
The Australian 4/7/1997).
This stand by Merchantile Mutual raises the question on the potential for future liability of property owners who give permission for telecommunications base stations to be operated on their properties.

Court Rulings on Radiation

In 2001 Waverley Council in Sydney received an application by Hutchison (a carrier like Telstra) to install an additional facility at Bondi.  Council resolved to approve the installation subject to the condition “that the applicant must agree in writing to release Council from all legal liabilities from risks incurred including any possible future adverse health impacts of electromagnetic radiation associated with the erection, maintenance and operation of this infrastructure”.  The Court ruled in favour of the carrier as Council’s requested indemnity condition cannot be severable from Council’s consent for the tower. 2002

The Swedish Environmental Court of Appeals ruled that the operation of ‘3G’ mobile phone antennas constitutes an environmentally dangerous activity.  In making this assessment, the court referred to studies that show evidence of potentially dangerous biological effects.  Another factor influencing the judgement was that the radiation antenna caused “dread” in nearby residents, which the court considered to be against the law.  12/10/2005

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against mobile phone companies in their bid to prevent litigation against themselves.  Mobile phone manufacturers Nokia, Motorola and Ericcson appealed to the Court to put a stop to class action lawsuits accusing the companies of not protecting consumers from mobile phone radiation.  On 31/10/2005 the Court rejected the phone companies’ requests, paving the way for class actions to be taken against the companies for mobile phone safety.

Norfolk County Council in the U.S. agreed in 2006 to relocate a mobile phone antenna following health problems among residents.  It cost the Council US$300,000.

The High Court of Scotland affirmed earlier legal decisions that Ofcom must make the entire contents of its phone antenna data base accessible to the public.  This follows an application by Health Protection Scotland under the ‘freedom of information act’ and means members of the public will be able to identity the locations of the carriers entire tower network. 
(Law firm Pinsent Masons:http://www.out-law-.com/page-9048)

Suing for damages

Lloyds of London (a leading underwriter) has refused to insure mobile phone manufacturers against the possibility of legal action in the event that mobile phones are established as a health risk. 
(London Observer 11/4/1999).

On 6/3/2000 the Minister for Social Health issues in Sweden acknowledged electrical hypersensitivity as a physical liability.  This meant that the organization of electrically sensitive people in Sweden known as FEB have handicapped status and received government funding.

In the United States in 2001 Dr. Christopher Newman, a 41 year old neurologist sued a number of mobile phone companies for eight million dollars due to his brain tumour he alleged was caused by using his mobile phone.  His lawyers were Joanne Suder and Peter Angelos both highly successful and well resourced lawyers who litigated successfully against the tobacco and asbestos industries with a team of 110 lawyers in six states across the USA.  Two other litigants were a 32 year old Motorola employee who tested mobile phones each day for nine years and the widow of a 45 year old businessman who died of a brain tumour.  All three had developed tumours adjacent to the position of their phone’s antenna. (Watt’s the Buzz?, 2002)

In 2003 a German couple appealed to the European Court of Human Rights after the installation of mobile phone antennas opposite their home.  They said that their right to live had been compromised by health problems caused by the antennas.  Press Release, Buergerwelle 14/11/2003

On 13/6/2004 Israeli communities in towns of Porat and Eiv Vered filed a lawsuit against the state and broadcasting authority for 25 cancer victims who got sick from radiation emitted by broadcast antennas. 
This station was closed in 2003 following the protests by residents but it was too late for the cancer victims who died. Haaretz 25/6/2004

A U.S. judge compensated an applicant for a brain tumour caused by radiofrequency radiation.  An administrative law judge awarded Sharesa Price US$30,000 in workers compensation to pay medical expenses incurred by her disease.  In doing so, the judge recognised that the tumour was caused by the radiation to which Ms Price was exposed to in her work as a mobile phone programmer.  Ms Price used a mobile phone for several hours per day in a room containing transmitters which emitted radiofrequency radiation.  (Sun-Sentinel 2/10/2005).

Michael Bennett has filed a legal claim against several mobile phone companies in the US.  He took action as a result of injuries he suffered from daily mobile phone use between August 2003 and April 2006.  These included loss of hearing in his right ear, vertigo, and loss of equilibrium.  Bennett said his injuries were caused by the electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones he used and that the manufacturers were negligent in failing to warn of the dangers associated with the use of mobile phones.  (RCR Wireless 5/8/2008).

An Australian woman from northern NSW is taking legal action against her employer for not protecting her from exposure to electromagnetic fields which have caused her to develop a serious and incurable health condition, anxiety and depression while working at the Company for three years. Measurements showed magnetic fields were 32mG (milliGauss) of radiation at her work desk.  2008

Lawsuits / Litigation

On 18/9/08 the Court of Nanterre in France ordered the demolition of a mobile phone base station on the basis that it represents a health risk to residents.  The antennas were constructed by Bouygues Telecom in the town of Tassin-la-Demi-Lune in the Rhone in 2006. After three families living near the antennas brought action against the company, the Court of  Nanterre ordered the removal of the antennas.  Its decision was upheld by the Versailles Court of Appeals on 4th February 2009.  The Telco was also required to compensate each of the families 7,000 Euros and more for every day the tower remained standing.  This is, as far as we know, the first time that the risks of radiation from mobile phone towers has been recognised in law.  The judgement referred to “a potential health risk” of the base station and to the scientific BioInitiative Report of August 2007. (Press release, Senator Jean Desessard, Paris, 5/2/2009) and (Vaucluse Matin, 22/2/09).

A Council on Sydney’s North Shore chose not to have Telstra install a microwave radiation tower in their area which was worth $500,000 to the Council.  The residents of the area (predominately of the Medical and Legal fraternity) expressed their concerns and suggested lawsuits would be taken out against Council when residents got sick from the proposed tower’s output of microwave radiation.

Melbourne Solicitor Phillip Nolan specializes in the area of law regarding microwave radiation towers, what is low impact, etc. and has provided communities with guidance on matters of this sort. 

Phil can be contacted at Schetzer Brott & Appel, Level 4, 50 Market Street, Melbourne,  3000 and PO Box 400, Collins Street West, Melbourne, 8007 or phone 03 9614 7000.

On top of Mt Wellington close to Hobart

On top of Mt Wellington close to Hobart there is a large sign placed near the entrance to the public car park warning people that their cars may be affected by the radiation emitted from the communications tower closeby.  It is headed “ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCES TO YOUR VEHICLE”.  It goes on to give people ideas as to how to possibly overcome the following problems:-
(1)  when their car’s central locking system fails and
(2)  when their engines won’t start or it does strange things and
(3)  to be mindful that rolling your car back down the mountain (when the car won’t start)
that the car’s brakes will not work properly.
This sign has been there since at least 2002 – DATA has a photo of it.

Persons in authority who have the power to vote for the placement of radiation towers have a moral and legal obligation under constitutional law to protect communities and the environment. These people in authority would not be taking ‘a duty of care’ to protect the public from potential health risks and a feeling of overwhelming ‘dread’, but on the contrary by knowingly unleashing radiation into the air of which they have already been made aware will harm and even kill the public. People should have the basic human right to live in a clean air environment if they wish to do so without being exposed to constant radiation emitted from towers, but this basic right is becoming difficult to achieve.

Persons in authority who directly give permission for towers to be erected leave themselves wide open to future litigation when the public become sick of which has already begun.  People are now slowly becoming aware of the reasons why and the sources from where they are contracting these diseases.
In the future (and not that far off) there will be such a large number of sick people that the health system will totally collapse.  There will also be a large number of medical staff who would normally be treating these sick people, but will instead be sick themselves. DATA hears that after some recent successful test cases, that the ‘Responsible Authorities’ who allow and give approval for towers may now finally be held accountable and liable in civil law courts as has already happened, but also in criminal law courts, as still trying to plead ignorance of these established facts is no longer a sufficient excuse given the overwhelming amount of proof that now exists from so many varying sources.

More information can be obtained by contacting:-

EMR Australia Pty. Ltd., PO Box 347, Sylvannia, NSW  2224.  Director is Lyn McLean
Phone  02 9576 1772   or   http//www.emraustralia.com.au  or  contact@emraustralia.com.au   

Mast Victims at  (http://www.mast-victim.org)  or  Mast Sanity at  (http://www.mastsanity.org)        

For material to wear, paint for walls and houses, and semi clear covering for windows which stops the microwave radiation from penetrating yourself and your house contact David Mould in Melbourne at http://www.yshield.com.au, then click onto areas required i.e. ‘products for sale’, ‘research’, ‘media’, then click onto these headings.