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

TETRA: current UK research and MTHR


Ask the Home Office or the NRPB for answers on TETRA safety and they will say ‘a comprehensive programme of research is under way’ with MTHR. Here is a profile:

No. of studies:


Human studies on biology of mobile phone use:


Non-human studies on biology of mobile phone use:


Studies on psychology of mobile phone use:


Non-health studies of mobile phones:


Studies on how to study mobile phone use, eg dosimetry:


Studies on mobile phone base stations:


Studies that include TETRA signals:


Studies involving human biology and TETRA handsets:


Studies involving dosimetry and TETRA handsets:


Studies on TETRA base stations:


updated: 12 Nov 2004

An 8 page summary of the MTHR research with occasional comment.

A 7 page discussion document on laboratory sensitivity testing conditions. Responses and discussion invited.

And while they’re doing that...

Here is a reminder of what the precautionary principle means.

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.

Read at length what the National Radiological Protection Board interpret as the precautionary principle.

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