Monday, May 24, 2010

ABATEMENT OF RENT / Blames cell phone for cancer / Dear Dr. McBride / Inventor Of The Cellphone / Widecombe Tetra mast

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

25 May 2010



Ronn Jefferies LL.B
Phone: 416-732-7541


The Hearing was initiated by the Landlord (just say Provident Management) for arrears of rent.  The tenant withheld rent and has paid it to the Board pending the outcome of the hearing.  Rent was withheld because the tenant (who is a single parent with a 14 year old child) asserts the premises are unfit for habitation, for her, because the landlord permitted the installation of numerous cell towers on the roof which emit microwave radiation.  The tenant has a penthouse apartment so these towers are 6 feet above her head.  To make matters worse, a number of towers radiate directly onto her balcony.

This occurred in December 2009. The client describes in detail how this has affected her health and life, perhaps permanently. Dr. Magda Havas (Professor at Trent University), a well known researcher and expert in "electrical sensitivity" will testify at trial.

Bell Canada is seeking standing to participate in the trial and to make submissions at trial.

The tenant is seeking a 100% abatement of rent (refund) as she has been unable to live in her apartment since January 2010. She has moved from place to place through the generosity of friends and has become painfully sensitive to all cellular and wi-fi radiation. She suffers daily and her health has been significantly compromised. She was an active, vibrant personality and person and now suffers daily.

Bell is worried that an Order from the Board will have wider implications and affect it's ability to place "towers where needed. The Landlord, who did not consult the tenants on the placement of the towers, will lose income generated by contracting with Cell companies for using rooftops of high-rise buildings for the towers.

Five character witnesses will be called at trial testifying to the debilitating effects on the tenant. One witness still lives at 2 Regal Road and will testify that she has lined her ceiling with steel, wire mess to mitigate the radiation (which can be measured) leaking into her apartment. Magda Havas has videos on You Tube. There is a great video showing the client and the towers as she speaks in front of her building.

Hearing time and place:

Wednesday, May 26,2010 9:30 AM
Where: Toronto South RM C, 79 St. Clair Avenue East, Suite 212, Toronto ON M4T1 M6 2nd Floor
You must arrive at 9:00 AM to sign in for your hearing if you are a party or witness

IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING so anyone can attend.

For more information or to schedule an interview please contact:

Lawyer for the Tenant Ronn Jefferies LL.B
Contact: 416-732-7541

(Submitted by Russ)


Local man blames cell phone use for cancer

May 24, 2010 2:55 AM



While studies have been conflicting, Paul Hankins is convinced his cancer was caused by a cell phone.

Paul Hankins blames his extended cell phone use for the cancer that developed behind his right ear.

"I'm trying to inform the people that cell phones give you cancer," Hankins said. "I'm living proof of it."

Hankins remains steadfast in that conclusion despite some of his doctors telling him otherwise.

For about five years the 74-year-old Jacksonville home-remodeler used his cell phone for work and just about everything.

"I probably used it about five hours a day or maybe more," Hankins said. "They're pretty convenient all right. You could take it with you fishing. You could take it on vacation so if you broke down on the side of the road you could call for help."

Last summer after  experiencing repeated headaches he went to a doctor. "I told him my ear was sore. It felt like something was eating on me," Hankins recalled. After a biopsy was done in July at Memorial Medical Center in Springfield "they told me it was a rare form of cancer," Hankins said. "I told them, 'Yeah, it's cell phone cancer.' It's outside of my brain. It's on the right side of my head behind my ear where I used the cell phone quite a bit."

A Swedish study published in 2006 concluded that heavy usage of a cell phone increases the risk by 240 percent of a malignant tumor on the side of the head the phone is used.  Another study published in 2008 suggested a link between constant cell phone use and salivary gland cancer. 

But the recently released results of the most comprehensive study to date did little to resolve the debate over whether there is a link.

The 10-year, U.N. study in 13 countries resulted in inconclusive findings. It didn't rule out that cell phone use causes cancer, but couldn't conclude that it does. The study said more research needs to be done.

Hankins has no doubt and wonders how cell phone usage wouldn't cause cancer.

"You get a very strong charge of electric current in your brain when using those phones," he said. "So it didn't surprise me that I had cancer."

After getting the news Hankins said he took a sledgehammer to his cell phone.  He urges everyone using cell phones to do the same, especially parents of children.

"I see these young kids all the time running around constantly with cell phones stuck in their ears," Hankins said. "Their young brains are still developing. They're all going to die young. They're all going to be in the graveyard."

His cancer went into remission after receiving about 17 radiation treatments. But after recently experiencing more headaches he set up an appointment with his doctor in Springfield on June 2  to review his CT scan from last summer or get a new one and more x-rays taken.

While one of his doctors told him, "No, no, no, no. Cell phones don't cause cancer," another doctor in Jacksonville didn't deny it could be the cause, Hankins said.

"I said, 'OK, Doc, write me a slip that says this caused my cancer so I can put [the company that provided his cell phone] out of business,'" Hankins said. "He just grunted like I was asking for the moon. "I don't know if I can sue," he added. "I've been writing letters to [the cell phone provider's] CEO in Houston, Texas, dunning them $50,000 for the cost of treatment for my cell phone cancer, but I don't hear from them."

Hankins said he has also has gotten mixed feedback from attorneys he has contacted about suing the cell phone provider.

"One lawyer told me, 'Paul cell phones don't give you cancer,'" Hankins said. Another attorney agreed to consider filing a class action lawsuit if Hankins could provide him with the names of at least 20 people with similar cancer and cell phone use histories.
"He told me that if I could bring him enough people we'll go after [the cell phone companies]," Hankins said.

Anyone interested can call Hankins at (217) 245-4916.

(Submitted by David)


To: Dr. Mary McBride

Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 4:09 PM

Subject: Cellphones and male infertility

Dear Dr. McBride,:

According to your biographical sketch, to which I presume you contributed,  "Her research interests include childhood and young adult cancer issues, non-ionizing radiation as a cause of cancer, and cancer registries."  With that focus, I am confused as to how it is  possible then for you to take the position that cell phones which emit non-ionizing radiation are safe for children and young adults.  Further, you actually assure concerned parents that there is nothing to worry about putting cell phone transmitters on schools


Now, I understand that you have been supported in your research by the telecommunications industry (e.g. Interphone Study; the WHO "Epidemiological Study of Cellular Phones and Head and Neck Cancer, funded by Canadian Wireless and Telecommunications Association and CIHR), but to ignore evidence of danger that your independent colleagues are finding, some of which, in fact, was discovered decades ago by the US, UK, and Canadian governments for military purposes, does not speak well of your objectivity, your devotion to science, nor your inability to distance yourself from the telecommunication industry.

But I'm going to take a giant leap here.  I'm going to assume that you really have not kept up with the science; that perhaps you have been under the influence of people of questionable ability, and, as a consequence have been taking positions that an otherwise competent researcher could not, in good conscience, hold.  To that end, Dr. McBride, I will endeavor to bring you up to date.  I will introduce you to studies in which independent scientists from around the world show harm from non-ionizing radiation at levels far below those allowed under Safety Code 6 (which you also support), and at levels produced by cellphones and cell transmitters.

Each week I will be sending you (and copying others) studies, by topic, so that hopefully you will see that the children and young adults about whom you are so very concerned, are being endangered by radiation from the various wireless devices to which they are being exposed on an ever-increasing basis. It is my sincere intention to provide you with sound, independent, peer-reviewed studies showing  health effects including among others blood barrier leakage, DNA damage, neurological effects, and even reduced sperm motility.

I ask that you, Dr. McBride, in return, read the studies and then tell me if you continue to believe that there is no evidence that non-thermal radiation at levels to which the public is being exposed causes harm, and why.

The first 5 follow and are by Dr. Ashok Agarwal, Professor, Lerner College of Medicine, Director, Center for Reproductive Mediciine; Director, Andrology Laboratory, Cleveland Clinic. His studies have shown direct correlations between cellphone usage and male infertility. In one study he discovered that a mere 60 minutes of exposure to GSM cellphone radiation is sufficient to show negative effects on sperm.

1. PDF File (agradoc250.pdf 388 Kb)
Deepinder, F, Makker, K, and Agarwal, A (2007):
Cell phone and infertility: Dissecting the relationship. Review Article.
RBM Online 15:266-70.

2. PDF File (agradoc239.pdf 174 Kb)
Agarwal, A, Deepinder, Rakesh, S, Ranga, G, Li, J (2008):
Effect of cell phone usage on semen analysis in men attending infertility clinic: an observational study.
Fertil Steril 89:124-128.

3. PDF File (agradoc301.pdf 156 Kb)
Agarwal A, Desai N, Makker K, Varghese A, Mouradi M, Sabanegh E, Sharma R (2009):
Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic waves (RF-EMW) from cellular phones on human ejaculated semen: An in vitro pilot study.
Fertil Steril 92(4): 1318-1325.

4. PDF File (agradoc295.pdf 877 Kb)
Makker, K, Varghese, A, Desai, N, Mouradi, R, Agarwal, A. (2009):
Cell phones: modern man̢۪s nemesis? Review Article.
RBM Online 18: 148-157.

5. PDF File (agradoc342.pdf 334 Kb)
Desai, NR, Kesari, KK, Agarwal, A (2009):
Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and carcinogenesis with focus on male reproductive system. Review Article.
Reprod Biol Endocr 7:114.  

I look forward to receiving your comments at your earliest convenience.


Sharon Noble

818 Bexhill Place

Victoria, British Columbia



Martin Cooper - Inventor Of The Cellphone

Inside Costa Rica
The phone came alive, connecting Mr. Cooper with the base station on the roof of ... ArrayComm's core adaptive antenna technology increases the capacity and ...

The question here is whether his invention will eventually kill more people than anything else in history?

And will Mr. Cooper admit responsibility?

Has he ever studied the health effects of microwave radiation?



Widecombe Tetra mast

The appeal by Airwave, over the Widecombe Tetra mast refusal by Dartmoor National Park Authority, has finally been decided after multiple adjournments and re-openings.  No great surprise - the appeal was allowed.

BUT - what must surely be an absolute first: partial costs were awarded against Airwave for "unreasonable behaviour",  in favour of local residents. The text of this costs award is attached (partial costs - probably the lion's share - were also awarded to Airwave against DNPA, also a partial costs award to DNPA against Airwave in respect of specific matters related to the re-opened inquiry.)

You'll note that the residents' costs claim was submitted by Richard Casey on behalf of local residents but awarded to Mr Casey personally, since the system doesn't appear to be able to make an award to an unspecified group of people or other body not specifically involved as such in the proceedings.  However Mr Casey acted throughout the inquiry as representative and communicator (both ways) on behalf of the local community.  This claim was submitted on that understanding and will presumably be dealt with accordingly.  Any further comment or speculation regarding this matter would be inappropriate as the award is presumably sub judice until settled.

Grahame Blackwell

One-time Widecombe resident, now living just a few miles from Widecombe.

(Presented evidence twice at the Inquiry as a local 'Interested Person'.)

Web site    e-mail

To sign up for WEEP News:  (provide name and e-mail address)

W.E.E.P. – The Canadian initiative to stop Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution