Letters July 23, 2009
Cellphone use is voluntary, cell tower exposure is not
http://www.theacorn.com/news/2009/0723/letters/014.html
NP Thank you for last week's editorial regarding cellphones and the disputed antennas to be placed in our children's playgrounds. The article made some great points. However, it also made an egregious error by saying there was a lack of studies and evidence on the harmful effects of cell antennas on humans.
It correctly pointed out that cell phones, held by the developing brains of children and teens, pose a greater health risk than cell towers. Scientific findings reported by the Interphone Study for the International Agency on Research on Cancer from several nations of the world, report a 500 percent increase in brain tumors of people 20 to 29 years old and links their cellphone use to malignant cancers of the brain, salivary glands and neck and, acoustic neuromas in the ear, a nonmalignant tumor.
The difference we are trying to point out is that cellphones use is voluntary while chronic exposure to a cell tower is not. Both exposure conditions create a second hand radiation pattern that is becoming harder to avoid.
In 2007, 16 scientists analyzed over 2,000 studies on the effects of electromagnetic frequency radiation on humans and released a preeminent paper on their findings called the BioInitiative Report ( www.bioinitiative.org ). The European Parliament passed a major resolution in April 2009 calling for more precaution in the use of cellphones because of this report and advised not to place antennas near schools and homes.
So far though, the U.S. government is strangely silent on this matter, probably due to the moneyed influence of the telecommunications industry. And the media also seems to be towing their line. But at some point, we all have to ask ourselves: Is the money and convenience worth the associated risks?
It does not take a brain surgeon to understand that the way to reduce a tumor is to cut off the blood supply. LVUSD ought to break this wireless spell by considering the health as well as the educational needs of the students and school personnel and not raise money by embracing wireless digital technologies that can damage them.
Howard Nehdar
Agoura Hills
----------------------------------------------
Hi All
There are many links between electro hypersensitivity and mercury. The story below is very interesting because it demonstrates similar stupid arguments and inaction's by government and health authorities on thimersol, as we see in the electro magnetic pollution situation.
What is wrong with people who should be looking after our safety, yet put us all in great danger?
Why are they not being made accountable for failing to tell the truth and for endangering the public?
Martin Weatherall
---------------------------------------------
Kennedy Jr. Explains the Autism Coverup (video)
--------------------------------------
Hi Martin,
The British Columbia Automobile Association has completed a survey on this issue. It can be viewed at:
http://www.bcaa.com/wps/portal/newsroom/member_opinions?rdePathInfo=xchg/bcaa-com/hs.xsl/8753.htm.
Please note that at the bottom is a link to the B.C. government for public input, which closes off on August 7th. This is an opportunity to make a difference and time is of the essence.
cheers,
Milt
---------------------------------------------
Telcos wring hands as cancer bogey brings down signal towers
Daily News & Analysis - Mumbai,India
The towers tend to emit electro magnetic field (EMF) radiation and the operators, too, vouch for that. But the radiation in the case of cell towers is said ...
