Please consider supporting our efforts.
Or Send Donations by post to:
Manningtree, EssexCO11 1SD
BECTA Wi-fi Report "Suppressed"
- Parent Category: Wi-fi, DECT and Smart meters
The article goes on "The TES has obtained an extract from the Becta study, which was carried out seven years ago when wireless systems were first being installed in schools, but it was never published." According to the TES "The report said the radiation produced by any device involving wireless technology raised health and safety questions. "During the testing carried out by Becta, which involved using at least six sets of equipment simultaneously, some engineers complained of head-aches at the end of the working day," it said. "But whether this is due to exposure to radio waves or some other factor is unclear.""
Jonathan Milne spoke to Philip Parkin, the general secretary of the Professional Association of Teachers, who has called for a full investigation into the networks. He said "We continue to be concerned about the possible effects of wi-fi, particularly on children whose brains and bodies are still developing".
The TES article continues "But government scientists have said there is no credible research to back up health fears about such-networks, although no research has proved them to be safe either."
"Recent studies had confirmed that typical exposures to radio waves from wireless networks were extremely low, Dr Clark said.
"The levels are also lower than those from mobile phones, FM radio, television and the numerous other radio signals in the classroom."
"But he said manufacturers and the Department for Education and Skills should consider commissioning an independent study of wi-fi signals in schools." And in the mean time thousandsof Teachers and Pupils are left to suffer - "Health Protection" indeed!
Press Release – Mobile Drama - 20th March 2007
- Parent Category: Media
Whilst Mast Sanity can never condone the violent actions of the bomber and gun man depicted we can sympathise with the frustration and powerlessness that many people feel over the whole mobile phone and mobile phone mast issue.
The programme also highlights the fact that there are many instances of radiation sicknesses and tumours, particularly with the usage by the emergency services of the TETRA system, with several deaths that are attributed to or have been caused by the direct use of mobile phones.
Mast Sanity Spokesperson Yasmin Skelt [2 ] said "The concerns of Mast Sanity are brought very much to the fore within this programme that for the first time within a dramatisation brings home the real harm that excessive use of mobile phones can and does cause. Even Government advice is such that people are advised not to use mobile phones for excessive period of time. It is though time that the industry and the Government took this health threat more seriously and introduced restrictions on the use of mobile phones and a precautionary approach to the further roll out of the [mobile phone mast] system".
Notes and References:
1. Davis & Anor v Balfour Kilpatrick Ltd. & Ors  EWCA Civ 736 (23rd May, 2002) http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/736.html
2. Yasmin Skelt was one of the first members of the public to challenge the government's planning policy in the now classic case that is often quoted in planning inquiries - Yasmin Skelt v First Secretary of State and Three Rivers District Council and Orange PCS Limited
MAST SANITY BRIEFING - PRESENTATION BY DR GEORGE CARLO – LONDON - 22 FEBRUARY 2007
- Parent Category: Home
1. The presentation took place in the Attlee Suite of Portcullis House, a relatively new annexe to the Houses of Parliament. The Suite seats some 150 people and was pretty well full with standing room only by the start time of 3.00 pm. Although notice of the event had been widely circulated to Members of Parliament, only 3-4 bothered to grace the occasion with their presence - a very poor show. Apart from the presentation’s sponsors, the Radiation Research Trust, like groups including Mast Sanity, HESE-UK, Powerwatch, ElectroSensitivity-UK were well represented together with many individuals concerned about the effect of EMFs on health. Also in attendance was Professor Lawrie Challis, Head of the Mobile Telecommunications Health Research Programme (and former vice-chairman of Professor Sir William Stewart’s IEGMP) together with representatives from the Health Protection Agency. Finally, Mike Dolan of the Mobile Phone Operators’ Association and several employees of the mobile phone companies were espied at the back of the room. The media appeared to have taken a keen interest with 4 video cameras constantly recording and an undefined number of the press seated in the audience.
2. Dr Carlo delivered a very impressive presentation (30 minutes without pause and without a note in sight). He began by describing the Wireless Technology Research programme and the subsequent foundation of the Safe Wireless Initiative (SWI), the principal mission of which, he emphasised, is not to engage in scientific debate per se but rather to offer immediate practical solutions to the problem of electro-hypersensitivity. He went on to cover a range of conclusions emanating from the Initiative:
a. After listing and describing the disease mechanisms in the three effect windows of the electro-magnetic spectrum he focused on the mid-range radiation where waves are modulated to carry information. It is this area which presents by far the greatest risk to health – particularly so given the proliferation of telecommunications installations.
b. In explanation of the mechanism that ensues, information-carrying waves trigger the protein receptors on the cell membrane. The receptors identify such radiation as foreign invasion and a series of biochemical reactions takes place (within 30 seconds). The cell membrane becomes less permeable which leads to a loss of communication between cells. Nutrients cannot get in, waste cannot get out. Free radical levels within the cell rise. This increase in free radicals creates disruption of DNA repair (micronuclei) and mitochondrial dysfunction – and thus cell malfunction. The next time the cell undergoes division (mitosis), the compromised DNA is replicated and the new cells act as if under stress even if the original stressor is no longer present (which could well be a basis for electro-hypersensitivity). When affected cells undergo apoptosis (programmed cell death), which is nature’s way of eliminating damaged cells, the micronuclei formed from the disrupted DNA repair are released into nutrient-rich intracellular fluid and are free to clone and proliferate. This is the most likely cancer mechanism. The loss of communication between cells cause by compromised cell membrane in turn damages tissue, organ and organism function; this is the basis for the acute and chronic symptoms associated with electro-sensitive patients. There is no threshold below which these mechanisms do not occur.
3. The solution to the above is three-fold intervention:
- Primary. The reduction/elimination of exposure, e.g. by shielding, and the employment of measures that prevent the inappropriate triggering of the cell receptors, thus acting on the cause of the problem (headsets and active/passive noise field technologies).
- Secondary. The support of the extant biological system through the use of measures that maintain/restore intercellular communication. These measures are most effective in conjunction with primary interventions and include: subtle energy technologies, diodes, and some pendants.
- Tertiary. The use of measures designed to reverse ill effects and to repair cell damage, e.g. by using technologies that act to rehabilitate and correct cell damage. These work only in conjunction with primary and secondary intervention technologies and include: nutritionals, anti-oxidants and repair supplements
The need for safe deployment technologies based on the use of fibre optic spines with an associated reduction in wireless signalling was also emphasised..
4. The SWI has established a register of many thousands of cases of electro-hypersensitivity together with a programme to communicate associated clinical data to the medical profession.
5. Research with autistic children indicated that their condition improved significantly when purged of mercury via chelationin an EMF-free environment. It was discovered that genetic susceptibility and heavy metals (mercury) in brain cells combined with exposure to electro-magnetic radiation, especially from mobile phones and masts, can lead to autistic spectrum disorders. The mechanism is linked to the cell damage explained earlier (the disruption of cell communication with high levels of heavy metals trapped in the nutrient deficient cell). Dr Carlo announced that a study is to be published inside the next two months outlining the link between EMFs, mercury poisoning and autism. He raised the issue of Wifi, particularly its use in schools, and was at pains to express his disgust that children should be the subject of, what he called, a 'mass experiment'.
6. There was no shortage of questions during the ensuing question and answer period. Unfortunately, several individuals in the audience used the invitation to make a statement or, on a couple of occasion, ‘make a speech’ – thus, Dr Carlo’s valuable time was not optimised to the benefit of the majority. Moreover, others fell into the trap of berating a perceived lack of causal research study in the UK (or the unwillingness of the HPA and researchers such as Professor Challis to recognise a link between ill-health/health risks and mobile phone technology) rather than focusing on Dr Carlo’s words and his call for a programme of clinical intervention research.
7. In his summary, Dr Carlo stressed that whilst he respected the 'research studies' being undertaken in the UK into EMFs, and in particular mobile phone technology, and health risks, there is an essential need for a clinical intervention research programme involving the medical profession to be conducted in parallel with causal research. The medical profession needs to be alerted to electro-magnetic sensitivity and trained to recognise its symptoms. And this is the point that many of us would wish to emphasise. People with electro-sensitivity in this country are suffering debilitating ill effects, the symptoms often extreme, with the Government, Health Protection Agency and both primary and secondary medical care practitioners turning a blind eye.
Please see http://www.safewireless.org/.
Dr. Carlo Press Release - 26th February 2007
- Parent Category: Media
There were only 5 MPs present at the presentation by Dr Carlo of the Safe Wireless Initiative, USA on mobile phone health risks at Westminster on Thursday 22nd February. There has been a virtual news blackout on his presentation in the UK media.
Mobile phones have been sold in the US and UK without any pre-market testing or post-market surveillance. US Congressional Hearings gave rise to a US$ 28 million research program by Dr Carlo and his team at Harvard to investigate any health effects of the technology. In 1999 the team released their findings 1. that there was leakage in the blood brain barrier 2 genetic damage from non-thermal radiation 3. there was a doubling of risk for a certain type of cancer. During 1999 and 2001 there was a split between the scientists and the mobile phone industry.
Asked a question about wireless computers being installed in British schools, Dr Carlo said 'the government should not be conducting this experiment' on children.
Although there are studies and research for and against health effects, the latest Interphone study does show an increase in brain tumours and acoustic neuromas. Because of that the German and Swedish Agencies for Radiation Protection have issued warnings for people to keep their radiation exposure low.
He identified a lack of and urgent need for a postmarked surveillance system to be established to collect clinical data. Robert Flello MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent) stated at the meeting that his constituents are concerned by a cancer cluster and he has been trying to get data about the illnesses and deaths but he has been sent from one agency to another and back again. No one is collecting the data.
Dr Carlo said that primary care givers need to be alerted to the situation and trained to recognise and treat the symptoms of EMF radiation.
Yasmin Skelt, a volunteer with Mast Sanity and who was at the meeting at Westminster said “The British Government need to urgently establish a Mobile Phone Telephony Surveillance Unit based on the lines of the vCJD Surveillance Unit (www.cjd.ed.ac.uk). If it can be done for vCJD then it can be done for mobile phone and mast ill health reports. Despite years of reports of cancer clusters near masts or a rise the incidence in brain tumours in the UK, no authority is taking data. Monitoring the health of workers in the mobile phone industry would be useful also, as they would have high exposure levels. Some early cases of vCJD were also mis-diagnosed and the sufferers given the wrong treatment, and clusters of vCJD were identified.”
Brian Stein, who suffers from electrical hyper sensitivity (a condition now recognised by the World Health Organisation) asked who would be responsible when the campaigners were all proved right. There was a deafening silence.
Easy Money or Fools Gold?
- Parent Category: Home
Before landlords rush to cash in on the idea of placing a Mast or Mobile Phone Antenna on the top of their block of flats, as Bernard Slade in Wimbledon Park intends to do, they might like to consider a few points.
Firstly, more and more evidence of negative health effects and cancer clusters are being linked to Mobile Telephone Masts in residential areas. If, or more likely, when these health effects are proven to be directly linked to the masts in court, compensation will be forthcoming from land owners, since Telecommunications operators are unlikely to fully indemnify land owners against legal action. In the recent TV drama Judge John Deed, (an episode entitled “Silent Killer”), the landlord of a Block of Flats was taken to court by a sick resident who lived below a Mast – albeit a TETRA/Airwave (Police) antenna rather than a similar 3G Mobile Telephone Mast. This may be fiction at the moment, but in the near future many such cases are no doubt inevitable.
Secondly, once the initial contract period is up, you may not be able to have the mast removed, since the Operator can claim the right to stay – even if the owner may wish to sell or redevelop the site. The text below recently arrived at mast Sanity from the owner of a Water Tower, who wanted to terminate his contract with T-Mobile:-
“I have given 12 months notice to T Mobile under the terms of the original 10 year lease I have with them requiring them to remove the aerials from the top of my house in order that we can sell it in 12 months time without the aerials on top. They have responded under the Telecomms Act serving a “Code Notice” saying basically they are a utility provider and are entitled to stay. In a without prejudice side letter they have said they do not want to inhibit the sale of the house but will need to find an alternative site. This will be very difficult in the area where I live. In discussions they have said they recognise that they will be liable to pay compensation if they stay beyond the end of the notice period.”
Question: “Does anyone have any help or advice to help us bring pressure to bear to ensure they vacate the site at the end of the notice period?”
The Reply: “Presumably you have taken fairly profitable payments from them in the past to have their antennas on your building. Nothing comes for free. Now comes the payback time.
Maybe you will have to accept that it has discounted the current value of your building and sell it for less than you had hoped - just like many of your neighbours may have lost value on their houses and found them harder to sell because you had the antennas on your house. You could try asking around to see if any of your neighbours would be prepared to take them.
I suspect you will be in for a long hard fight with T-Mobile - they became much harder to deal reasonably with after they had been bought by Deutsch Telecom.”
Thirdly, Is it morally right for the Owners of Blocks of Flats to take money in exchange for putting residents' lives and health at risk, purely for financial gain? Don't they have a “Duty of Care” toward their residents? If we were discussing the storage of Toxic waste or the installation of Asbestos sheeting on the roof nobody would rush to take the companys' cash – the only difference is the Official and Corporate mis-information and ignorance which surround Mobile Telephone Masts i.e. the very real and serious health effects from the microwaves emitted from them, incidentally including the residents living directly below the antennae. Surely it is completely wrong for anyone to impose such risks on people living within their care, when those people will have no choice about being bombarded with microwave radiation from those masts, purely to satisfy the landlord's desire for ever more money.
So, to recap, with the moral dilemma and the future serious problems that any Flat Owner may have with agreeing to host a Mast, is it sensible to take the Operator's money, or is it really Fools' Gold?
Barrie Trower's address to the Welsh Assembly
- Parent Category: Home
Danish Mobile Phone Study : He who pays the piper, calls the tune.
- Parent Category: Home
You might have widely read the story in the Press that "A long-term study, carried out by the Institute of Cancer Epidemiology in Denmark and published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, has found no increased incidence of cancer among mobile phone users."
However, if you delve a little bit deeper you will find that all is not quite as it seems.
Petition the Prime Minister
- Parent Category: Home
Petition the Prime Minister to acknowledge the many peer reviewed studies that show adverse health effects from exposure to microwave radiation.
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to acknowledge the many peer reviewed studies that show adverse health effects from exposure to microwave radiation from mobile phone handsets, base stations (masts) and wireless technology (WiFi, WIMAX, Tetra, DECT phones, etc.) through mechanisms independent of heating, and at levels much lower than currently considered safe by the government, and that there is no research or evidence which has proved their short or long term safety. We further call on the government to put safeguards in place, that acknowledge this evidence, to ensure that no person will be harmed due to exposure to this radiation, and to remove all mobile phone base stations (masts) that are within 500 metres of schools, homes and hospitals until these safeguards are in place.
Wi-fi / WLAN In Schools
- Parent Category: Wi-fi, DECT and Smart meters
The topic of Wi-fi or WLAN in schools seems to have come to the surface recently. Mast Sanity do not actively campaign directly on the topic of wi-fi, so we have less information available. We do have a Schools Fact Sheet here .
However, we do have several links to the subject here .
We also have Powerwatch's Letter here .
And Dr. Gerd Oberfeld's Letter here .
A local group have a document which includes research and information on wi-fi (including readings) here .
And Powerwatch have a very recent news article (look at the bottom of the new page) here .
See also stories - ICWAles - MP urges ban on wi-fi technolgy in schools
- Parent Category: Home
That was the message to Residents up and down the UK from Mast Sanity yesterday as Mobile Phone Operators (MPOs) resort to increasingly desperate and dubious means to erect their Mobile Phone Masts as part of the nationwide 3G roll-out prior to OFCOM’s audit in 2007.
The latest ploy being used is a variation on the infamous 56 day Time Limit. (The 56 day Time Limit allows MPOs to erect masts that are under 15m in height, if a Local Planning Authority (LPA) doesn’t notify them by the 56 day time limit to say that they can’t put the mast up.)
In the latest ploy, the date for the acceptance of a Mobile Telephone Mast Application is being disputed. By using an earlier date than that accepted by the LPA, the MPO's Agent claim that the 56 day Time Limit has been exceeded. Consequently, notification letters sent out in good time within the 56 day Time Limit are treated as being outside the time limit. If the LPA doesn't defend their time scale the MPO may, with no outright permission, put up the mast claiming to have Permitted Development Rights.
Armed with a slewed interpretation of the Planning process Agents have already convinced at least one Council to allow a mast to be built :-
Residents in Woking in Surrey woke up on the morning of Tuesday 7th November to find that a 9.7m mast had been erected outside their houses by T-Mobile – completely without warning. It transpired that the LPA – Woking Borough Council - had been aware of the problem for roughly 4 months but had not informed local residents (including any who had objected to the Application) and had given the MPO the OK to erect the mast. The LPA had been rather quick to accept the operator's argument and made no attempt to defend their position on the date in question. Residents are currently receiving legal advice.
The problem of the 56-day Time Limit has been around for over 5 years. Mast Sanity have repeatedly told the Government about this, even face to face, yet nothing has been done to tighten up the loophole in Planning legislation.
It is extremely disappointing and completely unacceptable that Residents are still being put in this situation after so many years.