Electrosensitivity 




Banning, limiting and avoiding cellphone towers


            back to: Practical Advice

 
1. Established ill health from cellphone towers

Since the 1950s some countries have adopted biological limits. These and others have long-term rather than heating limits to cellphone tower (mobile phone mast) radiation. They also often restrict the towers to locations at least 500 meters from people’s residences.

Other countries, however, have not yet adopted biological limits and still keep to the old 6-minute heating limits proposed in the USA military in the 1950s, declared ‘obsolete’ by the European Union parliament in 2009. The USA’s FCC still has these heating limits, as does the WHO’s ICNIRP, still used by, for instance, the UK. Heating limits, averaged over six minutes, are irrelevant to long-term exposure experienced by residents living near to cellphone towers.

Since heating limits were devised by the FCC and ICNIRP:

  • This cellphone radiation has been classified as a 2B possible carcinogen.
  • 80% of medical studies show increased rates of cancer, up to 4 or 5 times, for residents within 300-400 metres of a tower.
  • Medical studies show typical electrosensitivity symptoms near towers.
  • Other studies have associated nearby towers and similar electromagnetic exposure with other neurological illnesses, such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinsons, ADHD, autism etc.

Many studies since 2002 show that living within about 500 yards (460 meters) increases many health risks, including cancer by up to 5 times after 6 years, neurological conditions including electromagnetic hyper-sensitivity  and cardiovascular effects. In addition the general population suffers specific electrosensitivity symptoms in a dose-response pattern.



2. Banning or limiting cellphone towers

How far cellphone towers are banned or limited depends on current legislation in each country or state.

Since 1958 many countries have adopted biological limits.

Since 1998 when the ICNIRP, like the FCC, set its heating limits, cellphone radiation has been classified as a 2B possible carcinogen. Leading scientists say the evidence since this classification in 2011 is now sufficient to raise phone radiation to a 2A probable or 1 certain cancer agent.

Since 1998 when the ICNIRP, like the FCC, set its heating limits, 80% of medical studies show increased rates of cancer within 300-400 metres of cellphone towers.

These two factors alone make increasingly likely legal challenges to zoning and planning authorities allowing cellphone towers close to residences thus knowingly increasing the risk of nearby citizens becoming sick.


Evidence on cancer clusters:

Evidence of electrosensitivity symptoms and cancers near cellphone towers:


Belgium: Some leaders in the government of Belgium are aware of the established medical harm from EM exposure and accordingly limit the EM exposure to their citizens.


France: Because French courts have retained judicial independence over health hazards from cell phone towers, they are able to ban any causing health problems, or even causing a fear of health problems.


India

Supreme Court orders removal of cellphone tower because of cancer in nearby worker:


Poland: Kraków's mayor, Jacek Majchrowski a law professor, is aiming to measure the amount of electromagnetic pollution and to re-zone celltowers.


Taiwan: The government is much more aware than many of the health dangers of EM exposure and takes appropriate action.


Tunisia:


UK: Local authorities operate under the National Planning Policy Framework of 2012, which has the same ICNIRP heating radiation limits as Planning Policy Guidance Note 8 of 2001. The PPG8 was overturned in a High Court judgement of 2003 over an Orange mast in Chorleywood, where the judge ruled that the planning inspector failed “to adequately consider the weight to be given to the health concerns of the claimant in his decision letter”, since the Inspector's decision was based on the sole ground that, as there was an ICNIRP certificate, the inspector did not need to consider health further. The First Secretary of State offered to concede the case and to pay reasonable costs.


USA: The Telecommunications Act of 1996, section 704, tried to block objections to cellphone towers on health grounds. This Act was to support phone companies by preventing legal action after growing numbers of cases of brain tumours caused by cellphones in the early 1990s. In 2015 the USA Supreme Court finally allowed many of these pre-1996 cases to progress towards full legal trial. There are also problems with the Telecoms Act of 1996 in relation to the ADA (American Disabilities Act) where established conditions like real EHS which are counted as a functional impairment come into conflict with the failure of the Telecoms Act to allow zoning according to known health outcomes from cellphone towers. Some local planners are now voting down cell towers on health grounds because the 1996 Act is now medically out of date.


3. Adopting biological long-term limits


    (a) Limits 


  • The natural background level of radio frequency and microwave radiation is 0.000001 microWatts per meter squared (uW/m2).
  • The level of radio frequency and microwave radiation at which EEG is disturbed is 0.00001 uW/m2.
  • Long-term biological limits (Bioinitiative 2012) are 6 uW/m2 for the general population, and 3 uW/m2 for children, the sick, the elderly and sensitives.
  • Cellphone towers send working signals at below 1 uW/m2.
  • The ICNIRP short-term 6-minute heating limit is 9,200,000 uW/m2.


    Thus ICNIRP short-term 6-minute heating limit is some 3 million times higher than the long-term biological limit. 


    (b) Recommendations


  • Cellphone Towers should be at least 500m from residences.
  • Cellphone Towers should operate at biological long-term levels.


More detailed information on the established health damage from cell phone towers and agreed biologically safe levels for residential and work environments:



4. Avoiding cellphone towers

    (a) Location. 

  • Find an apartment or property at least 500 meters away from a cellphone tower, but much further if possible.


    (b) Screen the exterior of your property.

  • Grounded metal wire or mesh fences of a very small mesh size may help, but beware reflections and pockets of radiation.
  • Evergreen trees such as cypressus reduce radiation.
  • Earth banks can be effective if high enough.


    (c) Screen the exterior of your house.

  • Grounded metal wire or mesh fences of a very small mesh size may help, but beware reflections and pockets of radiation and do not enclose all exterior walls.
  • Carbon-based paint may help, but check for gaps such as doors and windows and roofs. Do not paint all exterior walls if possible, otherwise you can create a Farady Cage which can increase reflected radiation within the building.


    (d) Screen the interior of your rooms.

  • Carbon-based paint may help, but check for gaps such as doors and windows and roofs. Do not paint all exterior walls if possible, otherwise you can create a Farady Cage which can increase reflected radiation within the building.
  • Shield windows with silver netting, as used by the military against non-thermal electromagnetic warfare.
  • Shield specific areas, such as beds or chairs and tables, with shaped canopies formed from silver netting.



5. Refusing 5G mini cellphone towers with cancer radiation


All people concerned with human and natural well-being should refuse to have 5G mini cellphone towers deployed outside their homes.

  • Oona McOuat: "Cellular Deception" (2016, 8 min.)
  • "The launch of super-fast 5G technology over the next several years will dramatically increase the number of transmitters sending signals to cellphones and a host of new Internet-enabled devices, including smart appliances and autonomous vehicles. And the move to the new technology comes after unsettling findings from a long-awaited federal government study of the cancer risk from cellphone use."
    "Wireless companies will have to install thousands of small base stations — some just the size of smoke detectors — on utility poles and buildings to pass the signals along. The industry will spend about $56 billion to develop, test and deploy 5G services in the U.S. through 2025, according to IGR, a wireless market-strategy consulting firm. There were about 308,000 wireless antennas on cell towers and buildings at the end of last year, double the number there were in 2002, according to CTIA, a leading wireless trade group."
    "One researcher estimated a station would be needed for every 12 homes in a dense urban area. The prospect of more transmitters emitting radiofrequency radiation — though at much lower levels than those coming from cell towers — has alarmed people concerned about the effects on humans. The move to 5G presents additional concerns because there will be more energy in signals traveling over the high-frequency spectrum and the smaller transmitters will be closer to where people live and work."
    Kevin Mottus, outreach director for the California Brain Tumor Assn., said “These are microwave transmitters and the closer you are to them, the more problems."
    Desiree Jaworski, executive director of the Center for Safer Wireless, said “Right now, you don’t have to live next to a cell tower. If you’re concerned about it, you can move away. But once they have these cell antennas everywhere, you won’t be able to do that.”
    Jim Puzzanghera: "Is 5G technology dangerous? Early data shows a slight increase of tumors in male rats exposed to cellphone radiation" (Los Angeles Times, August 8 2016)
  • Ronald Powell: "Oppose Development of Spectrum Frontiers 5G on Health Grounds" (July 2016)
  • Lynne Wycherley: "Wireless pollution 'out of control' as corporate race for 5G gears up" (Ecologist, October 27 2016)
  • The Thom Hartmann program: "Will Your New 5G Cell Phone Give You Cancer? with Kevin Mottus and Dr. David Carpenter" (2017, 14m)