|
Date: 08 March 2004
To: Andy Davidson
Subject: Press misrepresentation
Dear Andy
Thank you for this. I am the science spokesman for NRPB.
Yes, the attribution to NRPB is a misinterpretation of what NRPB and other bodies actually say. It does not reflect the Stewart report either.
There is little doubt that some people are affected by the presence of masts in their neighbourhoods. This is real and not imaginary. The Stewart Report talked about effects on feelings of well-being.
Whether the effects are due to the radiofrequency (RF) signals the masts produce is another matter of course. Since their first production well over 100 years ago, RFs at the levels produced by mobile telecommunications masts have not shown effects in humans or animals. The science behind this has been reviewed recently in a report by an independent advisory group. You can find their report on our website.
There could be something particular about the TETRA frequencies but this has been looked at extensively too. (See press release). The Home Office is funding a large programme of research work on TETRA (See http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/)
Regarding the reported interference effects of TETRA on TV and other transmissions, yes, this does appear to happen. I can see how this could heighten perceptions of intereference with living systems, but humans are not TVs. Amplification circuits and loudspeakers can make tiny effects sound very dramatic. The transmission frequency used by TETRA (400MHz) is close to the TV broadcast frequencies. In our experience, where TV signals are weak, interference effects are reported. I understand that TETRA does interfere with some medical equipment too, again because of frequency band overlap. This is a matter for Airwave to deal with.
Yours sincerely
Michael Clark
Dr Michael Clark
National Radiological Protection Board
Chilton
Didcot
Oxon OX11 0RQ
| 
