Please consider supporting our efforts.
Or Send Donations by post to:
Manningtree, EssexCO11 1SD
Front Page News in the National Press
- Parent Category: Home
For years the Government and local Councils have been warned by many eminent Independent Scientists (and very many campaigners) about Cancer Clusters around and by mobile phone masts. As usual these warnings have been ignored by the Industry, most Councils and Government. At last they have been reported in the mainstream media - the Sunday Times on 22/04/2007. [Read the article here ]
Wi-fi (or WLAN or wireless networking) carries the same health risks as Mobile Telephone Masts. It uses the same microwave technology that Mobile Telephone Masts do. The health risks have also been ignored by Industry and Government. At last it too has been prominently reported in the mainstream media in this case The Independent on Sunday of 22/04/2007. [Read the article here ]
Wi-fi for All - Whether you want it or Not!
Powerwatch - Expelling the Wireless Myths
Powerwatch have put up a page to deal with the "Backlash" against the News Stories, as follows. "With all of the recent coverage of WiFi networks and mobile phone base stations, it seems appropriate to address some of the common microwave radiation exposure myths that get frequently promulgated by the pseudo-scientific, pseudo-intellectual technical community online".[Read the article here ]
T-Mobile "Bury" ECOLOG 2000 Report
- Parent Category: Home
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/.
To Bee or not to Be - That is the Mobile Phone Question
- Parent Category: Home
This is less of a surprise for some German Scientists who have been investigating the effects that Mobile Phone Masts and similar wireless technologies have upon the navigation skills and overall well being of bees for some time.
The USA has noted the phenomena of "Colony Collapse Disorder" (CCD) where bee colonies die out since the late 1990s. It is striking to see that states affected by CCD are almost all States which include large population centres or border on to large population centres. Large population centres do tend to have more mobile phone masts (in the US they are called "cell towers") and higher emissions i.e. "coverage" as the Mobile Phone Companies would call it.
One particular US location of CCD we have seen mentioned is where the hives were situated to the South-East of Portland, Oregon. In this specific case there are particularly large masts / Cell Towers in proximity, with a high mobile phone signal intensity (i.e. best coverage from one of the US operators' own map) present in the area. The signal intensity could well be significant in the area of the hives and could therefore be responsible for the mysterious disappearance of the bees.
Dr. George Carlo of the "Safe Wireless Initiative" and former head of the WTR Mobile Phone Research organisation in the late 1990s was on "Good Morning America" yesterday morning [16/04/2007] discussing the possible link.
The best and clearest Scientific information so far is German (another due is from Switzerland), mainly using DECT (digital cordless) phones. (DECT phones use hand sets and "base stations". These base stations are the equivalent of mobile phone masts. They operate using microwaves at a frequency of 1.9 GHz and transmit up to 100m away. Mobile Phone Masts use microwave frequencies of 0.9 / 1.8 GHz for GSM "2G" and 2.4 GHz for "3G" over several hundred metres).
There is an English translation of the study which may be downloaded from here .
In Summary the study found the following:-
* 2 beehives were unexposed and 2 beehives were exposed to a DECT base station (i.e. the equivalent of a mobile phone mast).
* 25 bees were selected from each beehive and released 800 meters away.
* Unexposed beehives: 16 and 17 bees returned after respectively 28 and 32 minutes.
* DECT-exposed ones: 6 bees returned after 38 minutes to one hive. The other hive remained deserted.
* In the exposed beehives, there were 21 per cent fewer honeycomb cells constructed in the hive frames after 9 days.
Basically the majority of bees whose hives were in proximity to the microwave radiation from the base stations just abandoned their hive and were not seen again. The few bees that eventually returned were less able to produce honey.
It is the use of DECT in the study coupled with the fact that DECT is thought of by most people as cordless phones which explains why the newspaper articles have mentioned "Mobile Phones" and "handsets" instead of their "base stations" and masts. It is the masts and base stations which affect the wider area which are likely causing the problems with the bees, not specific peoples' phones.
Obviously the situation is potentially extremely serious.
It may or may not have been Einstein who said "If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" but whoever it was could well be correct.
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?