TETRA: Say no to an unsafe technologyfind out more information about TETRA

Mobile Phone Mast Campaign


PO Box 11329
Sutton Coldfield
B76 9ZS

18th November, 2004

Mobile Phone Mast Campaign

I would like to encourage all MPs to support A Bill similar to MP Richard Spring’s bill on 21 May 2004 calling for all masts to go through the full planning process, which will offer schools and hospitals the opportunity to terminate contracts on mobile phone masts. This is of extreme importance, in light of the recent High Court Appeal in Harrogate on 12 November 2004. Three mobile phone giants won a High Court battle to site masts near schools despite health concerns and opposition from John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister. There is now an urgent need for this case to be taken to the House of Lords. I would encourage everyone to write to your MP and ask them to appeal to John Prescott to continue this battle in the House of Lords. The flood gates are now open for mobile phone masts to go next to schools. As stated in the Daily Mail Saturday 13th November, 2004.

E-mail the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister via www.odpm.gov.uk.

I supplied a huge box of research earlier this year to the DTI minister Mike O’Brien. Mike has taken the research to the Department of Health and the DTI. I encouraged them to focus on research from Russia, China, Sweden and other European Countries and to follow the example they lead. The UK has allowed the highest output of radiation in the world. They recently brought the guidelines down to meet ICNIRP standards. However this does not offer any form of protection at levels below the microwave heating stage. They simply make sure that the radiation does not allow your body to cook. We all know that before cooking takes place many biological changes have already happened.

The Government and NRPB now admit that radiation from electricity pylons doubles the risk of contracting leukaemia at the power levels of 0.4 microtesla, other European Countries have brought down their power levels to 1 or 2 microtesla, however the UK have remained 100 times higher than the rate known to double the rate of leukaemia. They also admit that they have known about this for over three years.

The Government has taken over £22 billion in the selling of the licences to the mobile phone industry. They put £3.5 million back into research along with £3.5 million from the mobile phone industry. Support has just been announced on 10 November 2004 for research on three additional studies for the MTHR programme. While we welcome further research, we are concerned that it lacks true independence and would prefer the funding to go to an independent trusted group of scientists.

Other countries now medically recognise that some people are electro-sensitive to this form of radiation. Sweden now has a medical register of 285,000 and California has 700,000. We believe these figures are an under estimation as many people are not aware that their symptoms are connected to the surrounding background radiation. However if the same figures apply to the UK we could have over 2.1 million people affected.

Sir William Stewart , Head of Health Protection, UK has called for the precautionary principle especially when children are concerned as they will absorb a higher dose of radiation.

However, the Precautionary Principle lacks a clear and universally accepted definition (Foster et al., 2002) and actions by some countries suggest that there is confusion and debate about what the Precautionary Principle means and how it should be applied. I believe that the UK Government must be confused by the Precautionary Principle:

The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992
‘In order to protect the environment the Precautionary Approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.’
Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty), 1992
‘Community policy on the environment ... shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventative actions should be taken, that the environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay.’
Wingspread Statement
‘It is necessary to implement the Precautionary Principle: When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. In this context the proponent of an activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof.
‘The process of applying the Precautionary Principle must be open, informed and democratic and must include potentially affected parties. It must also involve an examination of the full range of alternatives, including no action.’
European Environment Agency, 2004
‘The Precautionary Principle provides a framework, procedures and policy tools for public policy actions in situations of scientific complexity, uncertainty and ignorance, where there may be a need to act before there is strong proof of harm in order to avoid, or reduce, potentially serious or irreversible threats to health or the environment, using an appropriate level of scientific evidence, and taking into account the likely pros and cons of action and inaction.’
Children Act 1989 Part 3 Section 17
Places a legal obligation on Local Authorities to protect children in their area against significant harm and or abuse or the risk of. The Children Act stands apart from other legislation in so much as the risk of harm does not have to be proven or to have taken place, but could be a likelihood or perceived risk.

We are now seeing evidence of cancer clusters appearing in the main beam of radiation after exposure of over eight years.

In October 2002 a team of German medical doctors started the Freiburger Appeal. After seeing a dramatic rise in severe and chronic diseases, they have noted a clear temporal and spatial correlation between disease and exposure to microwave radiation. To date the appeal has been signed by 36,990, including over 1,000 doctors. In Britain a group of 30 doctors and consultants have started a similar campaign, we need to encourage all our doctors to follow the German example. For the latest update go to Dr Blackwell’s website.

There is a conflict in the science world concerning the adoption of the ICNIRP standards. The western world scientists are tying to force through acceptance of ICNIRP guidelines in order to create harmony and globalization. Many new European Counties are eager to join the European Union and willing to accept the ICNIRP guidelines as a consequence.

However the Russians, Chinese and many other parts of Europe are rejecting ICNIRP standards and are concerned about the biological effects. The Ministry of Chinese Health revealed that in the last ten years, studies on radiation similar to that emitted by the mobile phone industry have shown a majority of results are showing biological effects. In a survey by Dr Henry Lai, Washington University, Seattle 2003, out of 154 studies, 88 (57 per cent) have shown biological effects such as cancer, genetic, molecular and cellular changes, electro-physiology effects, behaviour changes etc. It said that the amount of evidence for biological effects and the characteristics of these are so alarming, that all efforts should be dedicated to find a way to minimise these effects.

The effects of EMR are also being felt by wildlife and the environment as a whole. Birds, bees, worms, trees are all being affected. We need to fight for not only the future of mankind but for the future of the whole environment.

I would advise all parents to encourage their children to use their mobile phones for emergency use only. There is now research confirming brain tumour connection with over use of mobile phones. We are also seeing a 40 per cent increase in brain tumours across Europe. A top brain surgeon spoke live on TV in Australia earlier this year saying he has seen chronic rise in brain tumours and a 21 per cent increase in children. Brain tumours are now the number one childhood disease. It has also been reported in the Midlands by a top dental university lecturer that ‘we are now seeing a massive increase in mouth cancer in children and teenagers’. I am worried that radiation from phones will intensify around the mouth if children are wearing braces or have fillings. What do our children and teenagers have in common? Over use of mobile phones, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out why we are now seeing a rise in mouth cancers and brain tumours.

I realise that there is an urgent need for education on the health issues and research. I have been alarmed at the amount of mobile phone masts that have been put near schools, hospitals and densely populated areas.

There are many ordinary people committed to fighting for justice. This has become one of the number one issues in our MP's post bags. Join the fight to bring about sensible legislation calling for all masts to go through the full planning process and greater independent research.

I would like to leave you with some final words from an ex-government military scientist Barrie Trower; he said ‘This government, some of the government scientists and this industry, will be held responsible for more deaths in peace time than any terrorist group in the world ever.’

Eileen O’Connor
Trustee for the EM-Radiation Research Trust www.radiationresearch.org
Chairman, SCRAM www.s-c-r-a-m.co.uk

‘Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.’

Margaret Mead

back back

unsightly but harmless? Unsightly but harmless? Is that all there is to be concerned about? 50,000 mobile masts in the UK may be more than we can take. And TETRA has special concerns of its own.

Home    National    TETRA    Science    Links    Localities    Campaign    Contact us