Welcome to Mast Sanity

We are the primary national organisation opposing the insensitive siting of mobile phone and Tetra masts in the UK. Read more...

Phone Mast News Feeds

News Now News Now
Google News Google News Feed
Powerwatch Powerwatch News Feed
** New** ES-UK ES-UK News Feed
MS Research Mast Sanity Research News Feed
MS News Mast Sanity News Feed

Donate

Please consider supporting our efforts.

Amount: 

Or Send Donations by post to:

Mast Sanity
c/o Highfields
Brantham Hill,
Manningtree, Essex
CO11 1SD

Research

We always need more research so please if you find papers that are not on our list please send us the link or the doc.

Looking at all the studies (we only have the tip of the iceberg here - there is in excess of 200 scientific studies that show a health problem from mobile phone technology) it looks as if they've proven a health risk over and over and over again.

However the argument the authorities and industry constantly chuck out is "...these studies have not been replicated.. they must be replicated before they can be scientifically accepted..." The implication is always that this has been tried and failed.. this is not true. From what we can gather studies are not replicated because they are not repeated (they are not given funding).

If the Government is serious about protecting our health and putting our children before profit then its time they put ourmoney where their mouth is. We guess that if the NEW research programs turn out a health effect they will be rubbished as not replicated. Lets put our taxes into repeating some of these studies so that we can finally get a true picture of the science

A list of published studies showing links between radition from mobile phones and masts and ill health

Contents:                                                                               

1.      General Neurological Complaints (12)                  

2.      Measured Neurological Effects (41)                          

3.      Measured Neurological Function (16)                      

4.      Observed Whole Body Response (2)                         

5.      Measured Changes to Body Chemistry (9)                

6.      Measured Cellular Chemistry Alterations (21)

7.      Cellular Damage and Cell Death (23)                        

8.      Embryo Mortality (1)                                                  

9.      Blood Brain Barrier (3)                                              

10.    Brain Tumours (15)                                                    

11.    General Cancer (2)                                                      

12.    Immune Response (2)                                                 

13.    Effects on Melatonin (9)                                             

14.    Sperm Quality (4)                                                        

15.    Miscellaneous Studies (24)                                       

16.    Epidemiological Phone Mast Studies (7)                  

17.    Phone masts' effects on animals (3)    


Total of 194 studies

By Dr. Vini Gautam Khurana PhD, FRACS

The completion of this paper on February 7, 2008 follows 14 months of objective
research by the author
, involving the critical review of over 100 sources in the recent
medical and scientific literature, in addition to Press reports and Internet content. This
paper represents a systematic and concise yet comprehensive review of this area to date
and its findings highlight an emerging global public health concern.

KEY MESSAGES OF THIS WORK:

• Mobile phones are convenient and frequently invaluable, yet exposure to their
electromagnetic radiation is invisible. Therefore, any danger this exposure poses
may be easily dismissed.
• Exposure is long-term and its effects on the body, particularly its electrical
organ, the brain, are compounded by numerous other simultaneous long-term
exposures including continuous waves from radio and TV transmitter towers,
cordless phone base stations, power lines, and wireless/WiFi computing devices.
• A malignant brain tumour represents a life-ending diagnosis in the vast
majority of those diagnosed. There is a significant and increasing body of
evidence, to date at least 8 comprehensive clinical studies internationally and
one long-term meta-analysis, for a link between mobile phone usage and certain
brain tumours.
• Taken together, the data presented below compellingly suggest that the link
between mobile phones and brain tumours should no longer be regarded as a
myth. Individual and class action lawsuits have been filed in the USA, and at
least one has already been successfully prosecuted, regarding the cell phone-brain
tumour link.
• The "incubation time" or "latency" (i.e., the time from commencement of regular
mobile phone usage to the diagnosis of a malignant solid brain tumour in a
susceptible individual) may be in the order of 10-20 years. In the years 2008-
2012, we will have reached the appropriate length of follow-up time to begin to
definitively observe the impact of this global technology on brain tumour
incidence rates.
• There is currently 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
Mobile Phones and Brain Tumours © 2008, G. Khurana – All Rights Reserved.
www.brain-surgery.us 4
consumers clearly aware of potential dangers and how to use this technology
sensibly and safely.
• It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than
asbestos and smoking, and directly concerns all of us, particularly the younger
generation, including very young children.

Read the full text of this Scientific, Peer-Reviewed Paper at http://www.brain-surgery.us/mobilephone.html  

How electromagnetic fields can disrupt both solar and magnetic bee navigation and reduce immunity to disease all in one go

rock_dove_-_natures_pics.jpg

Many of our birds are disappearing mysteriously from the urban environment and our bees are now under serious threat. There is increasing evidence that at least some of this is due to electromagnetic pollution such as that from cell towers, cell phones, DECT cordless phones and Wifi. It appears capable of interfering with their navigation systems and also their circadian rhythms, which in turn reduces their resistance to disease.  The most probable reason is that these animals use a group of magnetically-sensitive substances called cryptochromes for magnetic and solar navigation and also to control the activity of their immune systems.

bee_collecting_pollen.jpgBirds are very sensitive to electromagnetic fields and some may find the electromagnetically polluted urban environment no longer tolerable. Migratory birds may also lose their sense of direction and never reach their intended destination, perhaps just falling into the sea on the way. Bees are even more under threat and are extremely important to us. Without bee pollination, there would be very few brightly colored or scented flowers in the countryside or in our gardens and many of our crops would be devastated. We would be left just with crops that are wind pollinated (mostly cereals) that do not on their own provide a healthy balanced diet, nor do they act as host to the friendly nitrogen fixing bacteria that are essential to the sustainable fertility of our soil. This may be a very heavy price to pay for our unrestricted use of cell phones and other forms of wireless communication.

I am a retired lecturer in Biology from Imperial College London.

There is no doubt that prolonged exposure to mobile phone radiation does cause DNA damage in some cell lines. We cannot expect all cell lines to behave in the same way because of natural biological variability. We are all the products of thousands of genes that interact in countless ways so that each one of us is both physically and biochemically unique. We do not all get the same side effects from taking a medicinal drug and we cannot therefore expect to respond in the same way to electromagnetic insults.

Also, it is not a valid argument to say that because we do not understand the mechanism by which the DNA damage occurs, then it cannot happen. However, if you want a plausible mechanism visit http://tinyurl.com/5ru6e6 . In essence it says that the loss of structurally important calcium ions weakens cell membranes and makes them more inclined to develop temporary pores and leak. When this happens to lysosome membranes, they leak digestive enzymes that then damage the cell's DNA.

Having said that, most of the severely damaged cells will die naturally, but others may remain as clones of aberrant but benign cells that increase in number with increasing exposure to the radiation. However, we would expect some to be genetically unstable and mutate, with natural selection favoring the more rapidly growing and aggressive ones until we get a full-blown cancer. But even then, the immune system should be able to nip it in the bud; that is until the immune system fails due to old age or is compromised in some way. Consequently, the likelihood of developing mobile phone-related cancer will depend on genotype, duration of exposure and the state of the immune system.

However, the reported effects of living within a few hundred metres of a base station cannot be explained so easily. The low signal strength at this distance demands an exquisitely sensitive mechanism to detect the radiation. Unfortunately (for us) there is such a mechanism. It lies in the magnetically sensitive pigment cryptochrome. The cryptochromes are a family of pigments present in virtually all animals, plants and some bacteria. They are used to sense the presence of light, or the direction of the Earth's magnetic field in animals that use it for navigation. They also form an integral part of the biological clock that controls their circadian rhythms.

Put very simply, cryptochromes can measure magnetic fields because they absorb light and use its energy to drive an electron between two parts of the molecule to form a pair of magnetic free radicals. The electron then finds its way back, but the process is delayed by any external magnetic field, so that the amount of pigment in the free radical form at any one time is a measure of the field. Much of the cryptochrome is in the eye, where its different orientations in the curve of the retina probably enables migratory animals to "see" the field possibly, as an extra colour superimposed on their fields of vision.

Ritz et al. demonstrated this very clearly, when they showed that robins were able to orient in the geomagnetic field when given light of the wavelengths absorbed by cryptochrome. However, even more significantly, they found that oscillating electromagnetic fields within the range 0.1-10MHz at 0.085 microtesla (about 500 times weaker than the Earth's steady field) completely disrupted the system and the birds were unable to orient. (Ritz et al. Nature. Vol. 249 13th May 2004). It may be significant that this range of frequencies includes the bit-rates (rates of transmission of individual digital pulses) of many forms of digital wireless communications, including mobile phones, DECT cordless phones and Wifi. It seems likely that these forms of low level radiation may also interfere with the birds' ability to navigate.

We humans have no natural ability to navigate using the Earth's magnetic field, and we sense light to synchronise our circadian rhythms using melanopsin. But we still have cryptochromes, much of it concentrated in the pineal gland, where, in conjunction with the suprachiasmatic nucleus, it appears to regulate the biological clock that leads to the rhythmic production of melatonin. Much of the work on the biological clock has been done on mutants of the fruit fly Drosophila, and this too appears to be affected by magnetic fields (see Yoshii et al. 2009 http://tinyurl.com/cx7xaa ). They did not test oscillating fields, but a 300microtesla steady field could alter the rhythm of the clock or even stop it altogether.

The main significance of the biological clock for humans is that it controls our natural circadian rhythms, which enable us to anticipate the coming of dawn and dusk and diverts our body's resources to meet the demands of the new conditions. Many aspects of metabolism are controlled in this way; for example, during the day they are diverted to physical activity, but at night they are diverted more to the immune system and repair. If the rhythm were to fail or become weakened in amplitude, no process controlled by the clock would ever be able to function with maximum power. In particular, the immune system may never be able to summon the overwhelming power that is sometimes needed to overcome infection or cancer cells before they get out of control.

There is considerable anecdotal evidence for a weakened circadian rhythm in people living close to mobile phone masts, which include tiredness and loss of concentration during the day and poor sleep at night. The disruption of melatonin production during prolonged exposure to power line fields has been reviewed by Henshaw and Reiter (Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 7S86-S97 (2005)) and they argue that the effect on the rhythm may be similar to light.

The notion that weak electromagnetic fields have an effect similar to light is disturbing to say the least. In a paper reviewing the disruption of circadian rhythms in shift workers and others exposed to nighttime illumination Navara and Nelson. (J Pineal Research 2007 (http://tinyurl.com/afgLjr)) report an increased risk of breast and other cancers and a whole range of other health effects including insulin resistance, coronary heart disease, hypertension and myocardial infarction.

This clearly needs further investigation, but on present evidence, people living, and in particular sleeping, near a mobile phone base station may be at far greater risk of developing cancer than someone who just makes the occasional brief mobile phone call.

(for full context see http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/07/25/do-mobile-phones-cause-cancer/)

I wonder whether you would give me the courtesy of reading my letter and informing me what I have done to offend you - other than report on a rather inconvenient truth?

Of the five most recent visits here to my house (or phone calls) from your Officers, all - without exception - have asked for their details to be kept secret, for fear of victimization.  Three of the Officers specifically said "I have been told by my Federation not to contact you".

My most obvious question is "Why?"  All I have ever reported is peer-reviewed, published research.

It was you who ran a Police check on me and published it in your "Airwave - Biographies 23rd October 2002" (enclosed) - in it you also write that I was commissioned by you to write the Tetra Report!

Three years later, in your Police Federation News 24th April 2005 (P3) you not only deny this, but accuse me of dishonesty - i.e. leaking the finished document to the internet the day after it was handed to you.  In fact, it was taken by the Police Secretary as a disc from the Police computer within the secure room where it was written.  I never did - and have never - received a final copy of my report.  It could only have been given to the internet by yourselves.  I do not use or own a computer.

I feel I am owed an apology for your misrepresentation of me.

When your Officers contact me, they have absolutely no idea that they are a part of an epidemiological study into the effects of microwaves and cancer.  If you read my original report, you will see that the Government Scientists specifically say that, as you have a young workforce, fit, with well-defined work patterns - they will make ideal subjects for an epidemiological study, and  long-term illnesses (i.e. cancer) cannot be ruled out.  (Their  words, not mine).

I believe that this is breaking the law.  If your Officers are not informed of all aspects of this experiment;  it contravenes the "Regulations and Ethical Guidelines" - Directives for Human Experimentation - Nuremberg Code (enclosed).  This is to say that the risks of all radiation experiments must be understood before it is started and it cannot be against their will.  At your Airwave Conference 23rd October 2002, your Dr Levey told your Officers: "Use it or resign".

In fact, concerning risk, I took statistics from one of our Government's own Professors - printed in a Science Journal "Scientific American" - and adapted them for your Police Officers (enclosed).  You will see that there could be 1,090 slow-growing tumours at this point in time.  This figure is, of course, exponential - it can only get bigger.

You appear to ignore all of the internationally published papers on low-level microwave damage - most of which are conveniently overlooked, or have the "we will repeat this-over the next 10 years-delaying tactic".

Low-level microwaves have been known as very dangerous to our soft, water-based bodies since the 1970's, when Government Scientists warned the military, at the time, against exposure (enclosed).  It makes absolutely no difference which box they come out of:  be it TETRA/02/Airwave - or any of the mobiles.  The pulsing (modulations), power-density and frequency may cause variations with some people - but you cannot change the risk factor of the basic microwaves.

Consultant Solicitor Alan Meyer said "It is quite simple - an employer must provide a safe system of work":  You cannot - and will never - be able to demonstrate that long-term, low-level microwaves will be safe.

I believe, as a Federation, you could pull the plug on this Industry now.  I am prepared to bring you all of the evidence you would need - and I will stand my ground - against any group of Scientists/Professors you care to put in front of me.

Although I believe a solution to this would be for myself to write 240 words (one side of A4) - a Government Scientist to write an opposing view - you publish them in your magazine and take a vote from your Members.  After all - aren't they the ones who take the risk? (actually, research has shown it is the females who have a greater risk - but I will not go into why here).  Or you could just publish this letter - word for word - and wait for the response.

Airwave may be the best thing since sliced bread when it comes to reception.  I do not accept that any company is too powerful to be stopped/changed if the Members of the Force request it - no matter what the political situation.  Are you afraid of this scenario?

Which brings me back to my original point. 

  • Why, in a country of free speech, are your Members told not to communicate with me?
  • Why are they afraid to leave their names?
  • Why are they afraid of being victimized?

Would you please put in writing one thing I have written or said which warrants my censorship from your Members.

Barrie Trower

3 Flowers Meadow

Liverton

Devon

TQ12 6UP

01626 821014

17th January 2009

PS - The recently published "Biological & Cancer Safety Limits for Electromagnetic Radiation" places your Officers well inside the ‘Adverse Human Effects' box for the Airwave frequencies.