You can write your El Cerrito local group at: "apact_community@yahoo.com" for more information and to check out a copy of the new video "Full Signal".
1. Devra Davis Researcher & Author will be in San Francisco, see the below dates. She published the book "Disconnect" on Cell Phone research. A radio interview with her is worth the listen: http://environmentalhealthtrust.org/content/past-events-2010
Summary: She questions exposure to Cell Phones, Smart Meters and Cell Towers, as well as cordless phones, microwaves, etc. She is suggesting smart use of cell phones 6-8 inches off the body, not to put next to your body in your pants or shirt pocket, and use headsets, speakers and texting versus putting to your head. Don't put near your heart. Limit use next to your head to emergency calls if you can. Wireless companies use to have to carefully place Cell Towers, now they tend to pay landowners and place most anywhere.
"Devra, How I wish someone had told us this 23 years ago", says many with suffering family members from cell phone and cell tower radiation causing brain cancers.
Devra will be in town (Bay area)
Oct. 4- 11-
Oct. 6 noon- Commonwealth Club
Oct. 7 6:30 p.m. private residence in Marin – Devra speaking with Senator Mark Leno (wonderful supporter of this issue
Oct. 8 noon- symposium at University of California, San Francisco on this topic
Oct. 11 7 p.m. Panel discussion- Devra, Lloyd Morgan and Ellie Marks speaking on Wireless issues- JCC in Berkeley
Oct 4-11: farewell party & rallies for the CTIA-wireless association the entire week! The wireless companies will be pulling their convention out of San Francisco as it is the first city to stand up to wireless industry and require stores to post SAR ratings on phones if they want to sell in San Francisco.
to our Jewish friends and family- shana tova and loving cell phone free Shabbats idea Devra mentions! http://environmentalhealthtrust.org/content/past-events-2010(environmentalhealthtrust.orgenvironmentalhealthtrust.org)
2. New Documentary Film Screening:
A screening of the new documentary film 'Full Signal,' which examines the issue of the public health impacts of wireless technologies from a globalperspective, will take place in San Francisco on Wednesday, November 10beginning at 5:45 p.m. in the San Francisco Public Library's KoretAuditorium. A panel discussion of consultants will follow.
For more information: http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/full-signal-library/
For the film's website, visit http://www.fullsignalmovie.com/index.html
4. Quick Listen for the Family to get informed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tZDor-_co0
5. Find Cell Towers Near your Home:
www.antennasearch.com
Siting of Towers:http://www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/vol12/Martin/html/reader.html
6. Articles and studies you may not have read:
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF; http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/nicholasdkristof/index.html?inline=nyt-per http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/opinion/06kristof.html?ref=todayspaper
T-Mobile ECOLOG Report:ECOLOG study that was commissioned by T-Mobil Dutch Telecom and published in April 2000.The industry's own study has very dramatic conclusions about the pulsed microwave technology - the basis of cell phones, Wi-Fi, DECT, etc.. See section 7 conclusions: http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/ecologsum.php
The actual report in PDF format:http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/ecolog2000.pdf
Smart Meters:http://www.turn.org/article.php?id=875 http://www.yourownhealthandfitness.org/SmartMeter.php
http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/patphy/article/PIIS0928468009000170/fulltext
http://www.salzburg.gv.at/Proceedings_%2815%29_Sage_2.pdf
http://www.mycapturesystem.com/files/Cell_Phone_Poisoning_Of_America.pdf
http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org/
www.cabta.org
http://www.wave-guide.org/library/studies.html
http://www.radiationresearch.org/conference/speakers.asp
http://www.healthandenvironment.org/articles/homepage/559
http://www.yourownhealthandfitness.org/Topics/topicsRadiation.php
http://www.contracostatimes.com/search/ci_14710945?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com
www.emfsafetynetwork.org
Electromagnetic radiation and its effect on the brain: an insider speaks out -- Sott.net
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/207247-Electromagnetic-radiation-and-its-effect-on-the-brain-an-insider-speaks-out
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2010-04-15/article/35049?headline=Cell-Phone-Sites-and-the-Politics-of-Cancer
Friday, September 17, 2010
Thursday, July 29, 2010
San Francisco First City to Pass Cell Phone Right to Know Legislation: June 15, 2010
Wireless Industry Changes:
By a vote of 10-1, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors today passedMayor Gavin Newsom's cell phone right-to-know legislation today after 2amendments clarifying liability issues for the City and small businessowners were adopted by unanimous consent.
San Francisco is now the first city in the country to require radiationdisclosures at the point of sale of cell phones. The new law will bephased in over the next 2 years, with large formula retailers to be thefirst to comply, followed by small independent businesses that sell mobilephones.
Mayor Newsom held a private meeting in his office. We could not be more grateful for his time and his commitment to this cell phone legislation. He does not regret his decision in not backing down in light of the industry threats (and now the actual lawsuit and the fact they are pulling their convention out of SF). The mayor is more concerned now about the radiation than he was before! It is a simple “right to know” ordinance- similar to listing ingredients on food.
He wants us to take this legislation all over Ca. and the nation and his office will help us.
You can email him through starr.terrell@sfgov.org. He is considered a hero by the victims and their families! Also, please support him in his efforts to become Lieutenant Governor.
Most importantly – the science is now conclusive- the jury is NOT still out- cell phones cause brain cancer and other cancers when kept on while on the body. Read your user guide
ABC News Debate with Wireless and Mayor Newsom: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2Fid%2F15840232%3Fvideo%3D1553738956%26play%3D1&h=eae12
By a vote of 10-1, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors today passedMayor Gavin Newsom's cell phone right-to-know legislation today after 2amendments clarifying liability issues for the City and small businessowners were adopted by unanimous consent.
San Francisco is now the first city in the country to require radiationdisclosures at the point of sale of cell phones. The new law will bephased in over the next 2 years, with large formula retailers to be thefirst to comply, followed by small independent businesses that sell mobilephones.
Mayor Newsom held a private meeting in his office. We could not be more grateful for his time and his commitment to this cell phone legislation. He does not regret his decision in not backing down in light of the industry threats (and now the actual lawsuit and the fact they are pulling their convention out of SF). The mayor is more concerned now about the radiation than he was before! It is a simple “right to know” ordinance- similar to listing ingredients on food.
He wants us to take this legislation all over Ca. and the nation and his office will help us.
You can email him through starr.terrell@sfgov.org. He is considered a hero by the victims and their families! Also, please support him in his efforts to become Lieutenant Governor.
Most importantly – the science is now conclusive- the jury is NOT still out- cell phones cause brain cancer and other cancers when kept on while on the body. Read your user guide
ABC News Debate with Wireless and Mayor Newsom: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2Fid%2F15840232%3Fvideo%3D1553738956%26play%3D1&h=eae12
Sunday, May 16, 2010
While there are studies on Cell Towers, Cell Phone studies continue to break the news as well. Is the public aware of these studies and concerns that are mounting? Questions on the FCC Standards on EMF radiation emissions are coming from the FCC themselves, The Obama Cancer Study, 10 Cities and Resolutions Signed by Mayors including Mayor Newson in San Francisco, etc. Below is late breaking news on more studies coming out on Cell Phones and EMF radiation affects.
Let's ask El Cerrito to join other cities writing Resolutions to update the FCC Standards and repeal the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that takes away our cities ability to hear and use these health concerns when siting Wireless facilities. Let's Update our Wireless Zoning to prevent unresponsible siting of Wireless facilitites. Let's ask that we look into Smart Meters and EMF emissions at every house. Let's ask the wireless companies to put labels on Cell Phones in El Cerrito, so we know their output and impacts to our children (San Francisco is doing this). Let's ask our city to go green and use Fibreoptics or alternative technologies in our city, and support a green city that's cancer rates are not growing. Have your seen the cancer rates in the East Bay?
The Below article will be moved to the section on Cell Phone Studies, to the right side of this blog, in one week:
Even before the news embargo is lifted on the 5-year delayed Interphone study, news reports out of the U.K. have begun to appear communicating the very moving news that this long awaited study will indeed acknowledge that long term use of cell phones is associated with increased risk of brain tumors. The pooled results of the 13-country study (for gliomas and meningimas only) will be pubished in the International Journal of Epidemiology on Tuesday. Stay tuned for upcomig analysis from the International EMF Collaborative, authors of the landmark report, "Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone". The essence of the analysis will reveal that the risk of brain tumors from cell phone use is indeed far worse then has just been acknowledged.
Recent Press:
Heavy Mobile Users Risk Cancer
The Sunday Times (UK)
May 16, 2010
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article7127799.ece?print=yes&randnum=1273963242028
Landmark Study Set to Show Potential Dangers of Heavy Mobile Phone Use
The Telegraph (U.K.)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7725169/Landmark-study-set-to-show-potential-dangers-of-heavy-mobile-phone-use.html
Study links mobile phone use to brain tumours
The Scotsman
http://news.scotsman.com/topstories/Study-links-mobile-phone-use.6297703.jp
Let's ask El Cerrito to join other cities writing Resolutions to update the FCC Standards and repeal the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that takes away our cities ability to hear and use these health concerns when siting Wireless facilities. Let's Update our Wireless Zoning to prevent unresponsible siting of Wireless facilitites. Let's ask that we look into Smart Meters and EMF emissions at every house. Let's ask the wireless companies to put labels on Cell Phones in El Cerrito, so we know their output and impacts to our children (San Francisco is doing this). Let's ask our city to go green and use Fibreoptics or alternative technologies in our city, and support a green city that's cancer rates are not growing. Have your seen the cancer rates in the East Bay?
The Below article will be moved to the section on Cell Phone Studies, to the right side of this blog, in one week:
Even before the news embargo is lifted on the 5-year delayed Interphone study, news reports out of the U.K. have begun to appear communicating the very moving news that this long awaited study will indeed acknowledge that long term use of cell phones is associated with increased risk of brain tumors. The pooled results of the 13-country study (for gliomas and meningimas only) will be pubished in the International Journal of Epidemiology on Tuesday. Stay tuned for upcomig analysis from the International EMF Collaborative, authors of the landmark report, "Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone". The essence of the analysis will reveal that the risk of brain tumors from cell phone use is indeed far worse then has just been acknowledged.
Recent Press:
Heavy Mobile Users Risk Cancer
The Sunday Times (UK)
May 16, 2010
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article7127799.ece?print=yes&randnum=1273963242028
Landmark Study Set to Show Potential Dangers of Heavy Mobile Phone Use
The Telegraph (U.K.)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7725169/Landmark-study-set-to-show-potential-dangers-of-heavy-mobile-phone-use.html
Study links mobile phone use to brain tumours
The Scotsman
http://news.scotsman.com/topstories/Study-links-mobile-phone-use.6297703.jp
Thursday, May 6, 2010
May 6, 2010 President's Report: for Precaution with Wireless Technologies and potential link to cancer.
President’s Cancer Panel Recommends Precaution with Cell Phones and Wireless Technologies The President’s Cancer Panel reported on Thursday, May 6, 2010 that “the true burden of environmentally induced cancers has been grossly underestimated” and named cell phones and other wireless technologies as potential causes of cancer that demand further research and precaution.
In its recommendations to the President, the panel stated “Methods for long-term monitoring and quantification of electromagnetic energy exposures related to cell phones and wireless technologies are urgently needed given the escalating use of these devices by larger and younger segments of the population and the higher radiofrequencies newer devices produce. “
In this article about the panel’s report from Environmental Health News (http://snurl.com/w1788) Dr. Ted Schettler, Director of the Science and Environmental Health Network explains “Another sensitive issue raised in the report was the risk of brain cancer from cell phones. Scientists are divided on whether there is a link. Until more research is conducted, the panel recommended that people reduce their usage by making fewer and shorter calls, using hands-free devices so that the phone is not against the head and refraining from keeping a phone on a belt or in a pocket. Even if cell phones raise the risk of cancer slightly, so many people are exposed that it could be a large public health burden.”
Click Here to Download the Full Report by the President’s Cancer Panel
Click Here to Download the High Impact White Paper, “Cell Phones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern” (Aug 29, 2009)
Click Here to Read the Environmental Health News Article on the President’s Cancer Panel Report
In its recommendations to the President, the panel stated “Methods for long-term monitoring and quantification of electromagnetic energy exposures related to cell phones and wireless technologies are urgently needed given the escalating use of these devices by larger and younger segments of the population and the higher radiofrequencies newer devices produce. “
In this article about the panel’s report from Environmental Health News (http://snurl.com/w1788) Dr. Ted Schettler, Director of the Science and Environmental Health Network explains “Another sensitive issue raised in the report was the risk of brain cancer from cell phones. Scientists are divided on whether there is a link. Until more research is conducted, the panel recommended that people reduce their usage by making fewer and shorter calls, using hands-free devices so that the phone is not against the head and refraining from keeping a phone on a belt or in a pocket. Even if cell phones raise the risk of cancer slightly, so many people are exposed that it could be a large public health burden.”
Click Here to Download the Full Report by the President’s Cancer Panel
Click Here to Download the High Impact White Paper, “Cell Phones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern” (Aug 29, 2009)
Click Here to Read the Environmental Health News Article on the President’s Cancer Panel Report
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Letter From University of Washington Department of Bioengineering, Henry Lai, PhD.
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
Department of Bioengineering, Box 355061
Seattle, WA 98195-7962
USA
April 12, 2010
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my opinion and concern on the possible health effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless transmitters and transmission antennae (e.g., AM and FM radio, and TV transmission).
The level (intensity) of radiation from a transmitter that one would be exposed to is very low, mainly because of the distance from the transmitter. The level is generally considered to be harmless. Most research in this area deals with radiation of much higher levels. However, some recent studies have suggested that exposure to radiation similar in intensity to those from cellular phone base station transmitters is not completely safe. A list of biological studies on low-level effects (within the levels of exposure less than 200 ft from a transmitter) is attached with this letter. Many of these studies reported effects, e.g., brain cell damage, DNA damage, learning deficit., that could potentially lead to serious adverse health effects.
Furthermore, when considering the health effect of radiation from wireless transmitters, one has to consider the effect of long-term exposure. People who live close to transmitters are constantly being exposed to the radiation for months or years. Even though the level is low, it would matter if the effects of radiofrequency radiation turn out to be cumulative (i.e., add up over time). Small doses cumulate over a long period of time will eventually lead to harmful effects. Most of the studies in the attached list only investigated short term exposure effects and little is known about long-term exposure.
Therefore, exposure of the general public to radiofrequency radiation from wireless transmitters should be limited to a minimal. Broadcast antennae should be located at a significant distance from populated areas, schools, day care centers, and hospitals.
Sincerely,
Henry Lai, Ph.D.
Research Professor
Department of Bioengineering, Box 355061
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-5061
USA
Telephone: 1-206-543-1071
FAX: 1-206-685-3925
e-mail: hlai@u.washington.edu
Studies reporting biological effects of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) at low intensities
***Note: See List of Studies in "What You Can Do To Help & Research Articles" Section to Right on this Blog
Department of Bioengineering, Box 355061
Seattle, WA 98195-7962
USA
April 12, 2010
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my opinion and concern on the possible health effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless transmitters and transmission antennae (e.g., AM and FM radio, and TV transmission).
The level (intensity) of radiation from a transmitter that one would be exposed to is very low, mainly because of the distance from the transmitter. The level is generally considered to be harmless. Most research in this area deals with radiation of much higher levels. However, some recent studies have suggested that exposure to radiation similar in intensity to those from cellular phone base station transmitters is not completely safe. A list of biological studies on low-level effects (within the levels of exposure less than 200 ft from a transmitter) is attached with this letter. Many of these studies reported effects, e.g., brain cell damage, DNA damage, learning deficit., that could potentially lead to serious adverse health effects.
Furthermore, when considering the health effect of radiation from wireless transmitters, one has to consider the effect of long-term exposure. People who live close to transmitters are constantly being exposed to the radiation for months or years. Even though the level is low, it would matter if the effects of radiofrequency radiation turn out to be cumulative (i.e., add up over time). Small doses cumulate over a long period of time will eventually lead to harmful effects. Most of the studies in the attached list only investigated short term exposure effects and little is known about long-term exposure.
Therefore, exposure of the general public to radiofrequency radiation from wireless transmitters should be limited to a minimal. Broadcast antennae should be located at a significant distance from populated areas, schools, day care centers, and hospitals.
Sincerely,
Henry Lai, Ph.D.
Research Professor
Department of Bioengineering, Box 355061
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-5061
USA
Telephone: 1-206-543-1071
FAX: 1-206-685-3925
e-mail: hlai@u.washington.edu
Studies reporting biological effects of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) at low intensities
***Note: See List of Studies in "What You Can Do To Help & Research Articles" Section to Right on this Blog
Monday, April 26, 2010
Institute of Health & Environment, and Department of Environmental Health Sciences School of Public Health. Letter to Scout Executives
Institute for Health and the Environment
and
Department of Environmental Health Sciences
School of Public Health
7 April 2010
Ms. Lynne Leach,Volunteer President
Mr. Allan Westberg, Scout Executive
Mt. Diablo Silverado Council of Boy Scouts of America
Dear Ms. Leach and Mr. Westberg:
It is my understanding that you are the individuals who will make a decision on the placement of a T-Mobile cell tower on a Boy Scouts Camp in El Cerrito. I am writing to urge you to reconsider the decision to approve such a cell phone tower placement on the basis of concern for the health of scouts, nearby residents and children using day care centers and playgrounds in the vicinity.
I am a public health physician and former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany. I have been involved in the study of health effects of electromagnetic fields for a number of years, and have recently written and spoken on the subject. For your information I am attaching a large review article, as well as a publication that came from my presentation at last year’s President’s Cancer Panel meeting in Phoenix.
There is a building body of evidence that prolonged exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, of the sort associated with cell towers and cell phone use, increases the risk of several kinds of cancer, especially brain cancer and leukemia. Furthermore the evidence indicates that children are at least five times more vulnerable to these effects than are adults. Recent studies from Switzerland indicate that for an average person 40% of their exposure comes from the cell phone towers, which release radiofrequency radiation 24 hours a day seven days a week. The scientific details justifying these statements are found in the attached articles.
In my judgment it is unwise, indeed unethical, to place children and adults in harms way just for the purpose of obtaining funds from a cell phone company. I urge you to reconsider allowing the placement of the tower on Scout’s land. Thanks you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
David O. Carpenter, M.D.
Director, Institute for Health and the Environment
University at Albany
CC:
BSA CEO Robert Mazzuca
BSA President John Gottschalk
Prof. Marina Ratner
and
Department of Environmental Health Sciences
School of Public Health
7 April 2010
Ms. Lynne Leach,Volunteer President
Mr. Allan Westberg, Scout Executive
Mt. Diablo Silverado Council of Boy Scouts of America
Dear Ms. Leach and Mr. Westberg:
It is my understanding that you are the individuals who will make a decision on the placement of a T-Mobile cell tower on a Boy Scouts Camp in El Cerrito. I am writing to urge you to reconsider the decision to approve such a cell phone tower placement on the basis of concern for the health of scouts, nearby residents and children using day care centers and playgrounds in the vicinity.
I am a public health physician and former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany. I have been involved in the study of health effects of electromagnetic fields for a number of years, and have recently written and spoken on the subject. For your information I am attaching a large review article, as well as a publication that came from my presentation at last year’s President’s Cancer Panel meeting in Phoenix.
There is a building body of evidence that prolonged exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, of the sort associated with cell towers and cell phone use, increases the risk of several kinds of cancer, especially brain cancer and leukemia. Furthermore the evidence indicates that children are at least five times more vulnerable to these effects than are adults. Recent studies from Switzerland indicate that for an average person 40% of their exposure comes from the cell phone towers, which release radiofrequency radiation 24 hours a day seven days a week. The scientific details justifying these statements are found in the attached articles.
In my judgment it is unwise, indeed unethical, to place children and adults in harms way just for the purpose of obtaining funds from a cell phone company. I urge you to reconsider allowing the placement of the tower on Scout’s land. Thanks you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
David O. Carpenter, M.D.
Director, Institute for Health and the Environment
University at Albany
CC:
BSA CEO Robert Mazzuca
BSA President John Gottschalk
Prof. Marina Ratner
Thursday, April 22, 2010
MDSC Scout Executives Cancel Meeting with Public
Mount Diablo Silverado Council 77 Foot Cell Phone Tower:
April 22, 2010
Mount Diablo Silverado Council Executives cancel meeting with the El Cerrito Public about the 77 foot Cell Tower they are proposing with T-Mobile for money. After waiting since January to meet with the Council Executives, the executives cancelled the meeting less than 48 hours and for some less that 12 hours before the meeting. Many had changed travel plans to be there, including specialist that canceled out of country plans to be there. Originally stated the cancellation was because of neighbors' requests for more meeting time, it was found that the meeting was canceled due to T-Mobile's delay of updated plans to the city. The assigned PR person, who has never met with the community, is no longer assigned to thisproject. Community members continue to be amazed that the council will not meet, and will not communicate to its membership.
Evaluation of the T-Mobile equipment shows this is not a Tower for Reception in El Cerrito, but a high powered site for balancing load across other sites. Is this needed for El Cerrito service, no. T-Mobile stated at the City Planning meeting, it needs Towers every 1/4 mile. Can you imagine that?
Local Child Care, has written that this will impact their business.
Sierra Club is opposed to the Tower and its hazards on the community and wildlife.
This Tower will be fully visible from Arlington Park and Arlington Blvd as a fake tree, and reminder of the hazards it brings.
Write: apact_community@yahoo.com
April 22, 2010
Mount Diablo Silverado Council Executives cancel meeting with the El Cerrito Public about the 77 foot Cell Tower they are proposing with T-Mobile for money. After waiting since January to meet with the Council Executives, the executives cancelled the meeting less than 48 hours and for some less that 12 hours before the meeting. Many had changed travel plans to be there, including specialist that canceled out of country plans to be there. Originally stated the cancellation was because of neighbors' requests for more meeting time, it was found that the meeting was canceled due to T-Mobile's delay of updated plans to the city. The assigned PR person, who has never met with the community, is no longer assigned to thisproject. Community members continue to be amazed that the council will not meet, and will not communicate to its membership.
Evaluation of the T-Mobile equipment shows this is not a Tower for Reception in El Cerrito, but a high powered site for balancing load across other sites. Is this needed for El Cerrito service, no. T-Mobile stated at the City Planning meeting, it needs Towers every 1/4 mile. Can you imagine that?
Local Child Care, has written that this will impact their business.
Sierra Club is opposed to the Tower and its hazards on the community and wildlife.
This Tower will be fully visible from Arlington Park and Arlington Blvd as a fake tree, and reminder of the hazards it brings.
Write: apact_community@yahoo.com
Hazards on El Cerrito Arlington Park Community, Columbia University Cellular Biophysics PHD Letter
Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons
Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics Telephone: (212) 305-3644
630 West 168 Street Telefax: (212) 305-5775
New York, NY 10032 EMAIL: mb32@columbia.edu
April 3, 2010
An open letter to the community of El Cerrito, California
Re: Installation of a tower on the Boy Scouts campground
I have been doing research at Columbia University for over twenty five years, studying the biological effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF). I was also one of the organizers of the 2007 Bioinitiative Report on EMF that is available on the Internet. Because of this background, I have been asked to provide information about the potentially harmful effects of EMF on members of the El Cerrito community, especially children who use the campgrounds and the adjacent public playground, that would be exposed to EMF following installation of a proposed tower.
There are now sufficient scientific data about the biological effects of EMF, and in particular about the radiofrequency (RF) radiation transmitted by the tower, to argue against installation tower as a precautionary measure. We can state unequivocally that EMF can cause damage (single and double strand breaks) to DNA at exposure levels that are considered safe under the FCC guidelines in the USA. Since we know that an accumulation of changes or mutations in DNA is associated with cancer, there is good reason to believe that the elevated rates of cancers among persons living near radio and cellphone towers are probably linked to DNA damage caused by EMF. Because of the nature of EMF exposure and the length of time it takes for most cancers to develop, one cannot expect ‘conclusive proof’ such as the link between helicobacter pylori and gastric ulcer. (That link was recently demonstrated by the Australian doctor who proved a link conclusively by swallowing the bacteria and getting the disease.) However, there is enough evidence of a plausible mechanism to link EMF exposure to increased risk of cancer, and therefore of a need to limit exposure.
EMF have been shown to cause other potentially harmful biological effects, such as leakage of the blood brain barrier that can lead to damage of neurons in the brain, increased micronuclei (DNA fragments) in human blood lymphocytes, all at exposure rates well below the limits in the current FCC guidelines. Probably the most convincing evidence of potential harm comes from living cells themselves when they start to manufacture stress proteins upon exposure to EMF. The stress response occurs with a number of potentially harmful environmental factors, such as elevated temperature, changes in pH, toxic metals, etc. This means that when stress protein synthesis is stimulated by radiofrequency or power frequency EMF, the body is telling us in its own language that RF exposure is potentially harmful.
There have been several attempts to measure the health risks associated with exposure to RF, and I can best illustrate the findings with a graph from the study by Dr. Neil Cherry of all childhood cancers around the Sutro Tower in San Francisco between the years 1937 and 1988. Similar studies with similar results were done around broadcasting antennas in Sydney, Australia and Rome, Italy, and there are now studies of effects of cellphones on brain cancer and cancer of the salivary glands. The Sutro tower has antennas for broadcasting FM (54.7 kW) TV (616 kW) and UHF (18.3 MW) signals over a fairly wide area, and while the fields are not uniform, and also vary during the day, the fields were measured and average values estimated, so that one could associate the cancer risk with the level of EMF exposure.
The data in the figure are the risk ratios (RR) for a total of 123 cases of childhood cancer from a population of 50,686 children, and include 51 cases of leukaemia, 35 cases of brain cancer and 37 cases of lymphatic cancer. It is clear from the results that the risk ratio for all childhood cancers is elevated in the area studied, and while the risk falls off with radial distance from the antennas, as expected, it is still above a risk ratio of 5 even at a distance of 3km where the field was 1μW/cm2. This figure is comparable to what has been measured near cellphone towers. The Bioinitiative Report recommended 0.1μW/cm2 as a desirable precautionary level based on this and related studies, including recent studies of brain cancer and cellphone exposure.
As I mentioned above, many potentially harmful effects, such as the stress response and DNA strand breaks, occur at field strengths that do not cause a rise in temperature and are therefore considered safe. It is obvious that the safety standards must be revised down to take into account the established non-thermal biological responses that occur at much lower intensities. Since we cannot rely on the current standards, it is best to act according to the precautionary principle, the approach advocated by the European Union and invoked by the scientists of the Bioinitiative report. In light of the current evidence, the precautionary approach appears to be most reasonable, especially when children are the ones that are most affected.
Martin Blank, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of physiology and cellular biophysics
Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics Telephone: (212) 305-3644
630 West 168 Street Telefax: (212) 305-5775
New York, NY 10032 EMAIL: mb32@columbia.edu
April 3, 2010
An open letter to the community of El Cerrito, California
Re: Installation of a tower on the Boy Scouts campground
I have been doing research at Columbia University for over twenty five years, studying the biological effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF). I was also one of the organizers of the 2007 Bioinitiative Report on EMF that is available on the Internet. Because of this background, I have been asked to provide information about the potentially harmful effects of EMF on members of the El Cerrito community, especially children who use the campgrounds and the adjacent public playground, that would be exposed to EMF following installation of a proposed tower.
There are now sufficient scientific data about the biological effects of EMF, and in particular about the radiofrequency (RF) radiation transmitted by the tower, to argue against installation tower as a precautionary measure. We can state unequivocally that EMF can cause damage (single and double strand breaks) to DNA at exposure levels that are considered safe under the FCC guidelines in the USA. Since we know that an accumulation of changes or mutations in DNA is associated with cancer, there is good reason to believe that the elevated rates of cancers among persons living near radio and cellphone towers are probably linked to DNA damage caused by EMF. Because of the nature of EMF exposure and the length of time it takes for most cancers to develop, one cannot expect ‘conclusive proof’ such as the link between helicobacter pylori and gastric ulcer. (That link was recently demonstrated by the Australian doctor who proved a link conclusively by swallowing the bacteria and getting the disease.) However, there is enough evidence of a plausible mechanism to link EMF exposure to increased risk of cancer, and therefore of a need to limit exposure.
EMF have been shown to cause other potentially harmful biological effects, such as leakage of the blood brain barrier that can lead to damage of neurons in the brain, increased micronuclei (DNA fragments) in human blood lymphocytes, all at exposure rates well below the limits in the current FCC guidelines. Probably the most convincing evidence of potential harm comes from living cells themselves when they start to manufacture stress proteins upon exposure to EMF. The stress response occurs with a number of potentially harmful environmental factors, such as elevated temperature, changes in pH, toxic metals, etc. This means that when stress protein synthesis is stimulated by radiofrequency or power frequency EMF, the body is telling us in its own language that RF exposure is potentially harmful.
There have been several attempts to measure the health risks associated with exposure to RF, and I can best illustrate the findings with a graph from the study by Dr. Neil Cherry of all childhood cancers around the Sutro Tower in San Francisco between the years 1937 and 1988. Similar studies with similar results were done around broadcasting antennas in Sydney, Australia and Rome, Italy, and there are now studies of effects of cellphones on brain cancer and cancer of the salivary glands. The Sutro tower has antennas for broadcasting FM (54.7 kW) TV (616 kW) and UHF (18.3 MW) signals over a fairly wide area, and while the fields are not uniform, and also vary during the day, the fields were measured and average values estimated, so that one could associate the cancer risk with the level of EMF exposure.
The data in the figure are the risk ratios (RR) for a total of 123 cases of childhood cancer from a population of 50,686 children, and include 51 cases of leukaemia, 35 cases of brain cancer and 37 cases of lymphatic cancer. It is clear from the results that the risk ratio for all childhood cancers is elevated in the area studied, and while the risk falls off with radial distance from the antennas, as expected, it is still above a risk ratio of 5 even at a distance of 3km where the field was 1μW/cm2. This figure is comparable to what has been measured near cellphone towers. The Bioinitiative Report recommended 0.1μW/cm2 as a desirable precautionary level based on this and related studies, including recent studies of brain cancer and cellphone exposure.
As I mentioned above, many potentially harmful effects, such as the stress response and DNA strand breaks, occur at field strengths that do not cause a rise in temperature and are therefore considered safe. It is obvious that the safety standards must be revised down to take into account the established non-thermal biological responses that occur at much lower intensities. Since we cannot rely on the current standards, it is best to act according to the precautionary principle, the approach advocated by the European Union and invoked by the scientists of the Bioinitiative report. In light of the current evidence, the precautionary approach appears to be most reasonable, especially when children are the ones that are most affected.
Martin Blank, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of physiology and cellular biophysics
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Important Community Meeting with Scout Executives: APRIL 14, 6-7 p.m.
Hello everyone!
April 3 Update:
Nearly 4 months after announcing their plan to build a 77' cell phone / 3G tower in the Camp Herms parking lot next to Arlington Park, the Scout Executives have scheduled a meeting to update the community and present a study they have had done.
The meeting will be Wednesday, April 14 from 6 to 7 p.m. at the Camp Herms Lodge. Please note that this is scheduled at dinner time on the night before taxes are due. Please plan ahead so you can be at this very important meeting. It is important to express the community concern and growing public opposition to the Tower. The entrance to Camp Herms is from Thors Bay Road and James Place, on the north side of Arlington Park.
What we have found:
1. Is not needed: We have found that this T-Mobile Tower is not needed. There is a T-Mobile site less than 1/2 mile away.
2. The Boy Scout Executives have not communicated the plans for this Tower to their membership and will not agree (as asked by troop 100 ASM) to do so. The MDSC Executives said they would not sign contract with T-Mobile until they talked with the community about their concerns, and until they had completed an independent report looking into public concerns. Neither has happened and a contract is signed. The independent report was just communicated to be a report by an engineering firm Hammet & Edison (the engineering firm used by wireless companies).
3. Is a very high power site: Engineering review of the Tower, show this as one of the highest power sites, more geared for "smart" service and future expansion and offloading from other sites, versus for service in El Cerrito, as stated. It is strong enough to go 50-75 miles out.
4. Health Hazards: Studies are showing increased risk of health hazards near Towers (see links on the blog).
5. This Fake Tree Tower will be visible from Arlington Park, Arlington Blvd, Neighbors and prominent directly in line and view as you enter Camp Herms and park next to it in the parking lot.
6. Sudies show impacts to property values and thus also city property tax. The city and community will be impacted by this Tower.
7. Sierra Club opposes this Tower and its location.
8. San Francisco board of Supervisors' Resolution on the potential health impacts of wireless facilities passed and was signed by Mayor Newsom. It asks for the FCC to update existing standards that only cover thermal radiation and leave open the impacts of low frequency non-ionizing electro magnetic radiation where studies show increased cancer rates. It asks for the repeal of limitations that prevent State and Local governments from considering health concerns in siting of wireless facilities in the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
http://www.sfbos.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/bdsupvrs/resolutions10/r0102-10.pdf
If you can lend a hand with press, research, strategy or anything, please reply at apact_community@yahoo.com
Thanks, and see you on the 14th!
April 3 Update:
Nearly 4 months after announcing their plan to build a 77' cell phone / 3G tower in the Camp Herms parking lot next to Arlington Park, the Scout Executives have scheduled a meeting to update the community and present a study they have had done.
The meeting will be Wednesday, April 14 from 6 to 7 p.m. at the Camp Herms Lodge. Please note that this is scheduled at dinner time on the night before taxes are due. Please plan ahead so you can be at this very important meeting. It is important to express the community concern and growing public opposition to the Tower. The entrance to Camp Herms is from Thors Bay Road and James Place, on the north side of Arlington Park.
What we have found:
1. Is not needed: We have found that this T-Mobile Tower is not needed. There is a T-Mobile site less than 1/2 mile away.
2. The Boy Scout Executives have not communicated the plans for this Tower to their membership and will not agree (as asked by troop 100 ASM) to do so. The MDSC Executives said they would not sign contract with T-Mobile until they talked with the community about their concerns, and until they had completed an independent report looking into public concerns. Neither has happened and a contract is signed. The independent report was just communicated to be a report by an engineering firm Hammet & Edison (the engineering firm used by wireless companies).
3. Is a very high power site: Engineering review of the Tower, show this as one of the highest power sites, more geared for "smart" service and future expansion and offloading from other sites, versus for service in El Cerrito, as stated. It is strong enough to go 50-75 miles out.
4. Health Hazards: Studies are showing increased risk of health hazards near Towers (see links on the blog).
5. This Fake Tree Tower will be visible from Arlington Park, Arlington Blvd, Neighbors and prominent directly in line and view as you enter Camp Herms and park next to it in the parking lot.
6. Sudies show impacts to property values and thus also city property tax. The city and community will be impacted by this Tower.
7. Sierra Club opposes this Tower and its location.
8. San Francisco board of Supervisors' Resolution on the potential health impacts of wireless facilities passed and was signed by Mayor Newsom. It asks for the FCC to update existing standards that only cover thermal radiation and leave open the impacts of low frequency non-ionizing electro magnetic radiation where studies show increased cancer rates. It asks for the repeal of limitations that prevent State and Local governments from considering health concerns in siting of wireless facilities in the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
http://www.sfbos.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/bdsupvrs/resolutions10/r0102-10.pdf
If you can lend a hand with press, research, strategy or anything, please reply at apact_community@yahoo.com
Thanks, and see you on the 14th!
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
APACT for Responsible Cell Tower Siting
Camp Herms Boy Scout Executives Propose to Install Large, Radiation-Emitting Commercial Cell Tower and Antennas Above Arlington Park
- Commercial project will subject families, children, boy scouts and Neighbors to continuous EMR Radiation 24 hours a day
- Studies suggest that children should be at least 1,300 feet (1/4 mile) from such emitters
- Studies show mounting concern about Cell Towers and decreased surrounding Property values
- T-Mobile already owns the Moesar & Arlington Site less than ½ mile away.
- Cell Tower Sites should not be near Parks, Schools, and Residential areas. Example: Los Angeles County is stopping all such Installations near their schools.
Answers about the proposed Camp Herms Boy Scout T-Mobile Cell Tower
1. What is this? It is a commercial wireless broadcasting tower with proposed 6-12 antenna, expandable to 36.
2. What is its purpose? Plans submitted to the city stated it was to increase service in El Cerrito. Testing of T-Mobile phones showed that the areas stated with no or low service, had full service. It will NOT improve cell phone reception. They plan to offload and balance other sites to El Cerrito.
3. Is this needed? Absolutely not! T-Mobile has coverage and an Antenna site at Moesar and Arlington, less than ½ mile away.
4. Who would benefit from this commercial installation? Mt. Diablo Silverado Council, boy scouts, would receive payment from T-Mobile.
5. Is this safe? Multiple studies – primarily in Europe – conclude that living, working or spending the day at a park or school near such emitters is dangerous, especially for children. For example:
- Growing evidence shows that even small emissions from cell phone towers are “dangerous to human health” [Health Effects from Cell Phone Tower Radiation. http://www.mountshastaecology.org/Archive/Health_Effects_from_Cell_Phone_Tower_Radiation.html]
- Studies show living within ¼ mile of such antennas increases cancer 3 to 4 times. [Cell Phone Towers: How Far is Safe? www.emf-health.com/articles-celltower.htm ]
http://www.emrnetwork.org (Santini 2002)
- “As a general rule, cell towers should not be placed near schools.” They should not be placed near residential areas, public parks, nursing homes, etc. [www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35421-2004Dec29_2.html http://repfloren.com/?p=163 ]
For now, few families want their children anywhere near such antennas.
6. Do Cell Phone Towers reduce property values? Yes, studies show mounting concern about cell tower health risks, and decreased surrounding property values. [Study by Sandy Bond, PhD, Appraisal Institute and realtors.
7. Where is it to be located? Just inside the entrance to Camp Herms, just above Arlington Park, in the south/east corner of the parking lot as you drive in. 77 Foot Metal and Plastic Tree with 6-12 antenna, capacity set up for 36 antenna.
8. Where can I get more information?
What are the health risks? [ http://bioinitiative.org/report/index.htm ]
Resolutions to Regulate Cell Tower Sitings [ www.cloutnow.org/lacbos/ ]
International Association of Fire Fighters oppose Cell Towers on their sites “until proven not hazardous to health” [www.iaff.org/hs/Facts/CellTowerFinal.asp]
Documented adverse health effects of Cell radio-frequency (RF, EMR) Towers:
– decreased immune function
– DNA damage
-- sleep disorders & decrease in REM sleep (important for memory & learning); Santini 2002
– impaired nervous system activity
– slowed motor skills & reaction time in school children
– loss of concentration
-- cancer
-- Alzheimer’s
– significant increases in leukemia & bladder cancer in children & adults
- Commercial project will subject families, children, boy scouts and Neighbors to continuous EMR Radiation 24 hours a day
- Studies suggest that children should be at least 1,300 feet (1/4 mile) from such emitters
- Studies show mounting concern about Cell Towers and decreased surrounding Property values
- T-Mobile already owns the Moesar & Arlington Site less than ½ mile away.
- Cell Tower Sites should not be near Parks, Schools, and Residential areas. Example: Los Angeles County is stopping all such Installations near their schools.
Answers about the proposed Camp Herms Boy Scout T-Mobile Cell Tower
1. What is this? It is a commercial wireless broadcasting tower with proposed 6-12 antenna, expandable to 36.
2. What is its purpose? Plans submitted to the city stated it was to increase service in El Cerrito. Testing of T-Mobile phones showed that the areas stated with no or low service, had full service. It will NOT improve cell phone reception. They plan to offload and balance other sites to El Cerrito.
3. Is this needed? Absolutely not! T-Mobile has coverage and an Antenna site at Moesar and Arlington, less than ½ mile away.
4. Who would benefit from this commercial installation? Mt. Diablo Silverado Council, boy scouts, would receive payment from T-Mobile.
5. Is this safe? Multiple studies – primarily in Europe – conclude that living, working or spending the day at a park or school near such emitters is dangerous, especially for children. For example:
- Growing evidence shows that even small emissions from cell phone towers are “dangerous to human health” [Health Effects from Cell Phone Tower Radiation. http://www.mountshastaecology.org/Archive/Health_Effects_from_Cell_Phone_Tower_Radiation.html]
- Studies show living within ¼ mile of such antennas increases cancer 3 to 4 times. [Cell Phone Towers: How Far is Safe? www.emf-health.com/articles-celltower.htm ]
http://www.emrnetwork.org (Santini 2002)
- “As a general rule, cell towers should not be placed near schools.” They should not be placed near residential areas, public parks, nursing homes, etc. [www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35421-2004Dec29_2.html http://repfloren.com/?p=163 ]
For now, few families want their children anywhere near such antennas.
6. Do Cell Phone Towers reduce property values? Yes, studies show mounting concern about cell tower health risks, and decreased surrounding property values. [Study by Sandy Bond, PhD, Appraisal Institute and realtors.
7. Where is it to be located? Just inside the entrance to Camp Herms, just above Arlington Park, in the south/east corner of the parking lot as you drive in. 77 Foot Metal and Plastic Tree with 6-12 antenna, capacity set up for 36 antenna.
8. Where can I get more information?
What are the health risks? [ http://bioinitiative.org/report/index.htm ]
Resolutions to Regulate Cell Tower Sitings [ www.cloutnow.org/lacbos/ ]
International Association of Fire Fighters oppose Cell Towers on their sites “until proven not hazardous to health” [www.iaff.org/hs/Facts/CellTowerFinal.asp]
Documented adverse health effects of Cell radio-frequency (RF, EMR) Towers:
– decreased immune function
– DNA damage
-- sleep disorders & decrease in REM sleep (important for memory & learning); Santini 2002
– impaired nervous system activity
– slowed motor skills & reaction time in school children
– loss of concentration
-- cancer
-- Alzheimer’s
– significant increases in leukemia & bladder cancer in children & adults
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)