THE TOWN WANTS TO PUT UP A 150 FT. CELL TOWER 20 FT. FROM MY KIDS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THE COMPANY CLAIMS THAT NO HARMFUL HEALTH AFFECTS CAN COME OF THIS???? WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? THERE ARE CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS 3 AT THIS SCHOOL…. DO YOU KNOW OF ANY REPUTABLE WEBSITES THAT I CAN COLLECT DATA FROM ABOUT HEALTH RISKS TO CHILDREN FROM COMMUNICATION AND CELL TOWERS. THE COMPANY KEEPS TELLING THE TOWN THAT THERE ARE NO SCIENTIFIC STUDIES THAT PROVE THAT CELL TOWERS POSE ANY HEALTH RISKS!!! BUT I SAY, THERE ARE NO STUDIES THAT PROVE THAT THEY DON’T!!!!!!! IS THERE SOME KIND OF “BUFFER ZONE” NEEDED? HOW DO I KNOW THAT YEARS DOWN THE ROAD MY KIDS WONT DEVELOP CANCER OR BRAIN TUMORS????
THERE WILL BE ONE AT THE HIGH SCHOOL AS WELL SO 5 YEARS OF THIS AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND THEN ANOTHER 4 YEARS AT THE HIGH SCHOOL!!!
WHAT IS THIS A SCIENCE EXPERIMENT? PLEASE HELP!!!!! THESE ARE VERY YOUNG CHILDREN, THEIR SKULLS ARENT EVEN FULLY DEVELOPED YET. THE BONE ISN’T AS THICK AS IN AN ADULT…. I NEED SOME REPUTABLE SITES TO DO RESEARCH WITH!!! THANK YOU
REMEMBER WHEN SMOKING WAS SAFE???
WHAT ABOUT WHAT WE NOW KNOW ABOUT ASBESTOS????
actually, for your information ‘BALLS” I read that in the journal of pediatrics.
Balls
June 9, 2010 at 5:26 am
You are an idiot. You will most likely give your child a cell phone at the age of 10, anyway. Your argument is that their skulls are not as thick? I think your skull is too thick.
Frugal
June 9, 2010 at 6:14 am
Ask about the wave propagation from the cell tower. Do to the highly directional nature of microwave energy it’s possible that the beam has not spread (out) down to the school or ask them to put it closer or right on top of the school so the kids are in the dead zone. The dead zone is not were people die, but effectively where the single of that tower is not present.
Pascal
June 9, 2010 at 6:28 am
Dear You!
Your question is about getting some reputable sites to do research with, so here they are:
—1. “Implementation report on the Council Recommendation limiting the public exposure to electromagnetic fields”, (European Community):
http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_determinants/environment/EMF/implement_rep_en.pdf
—2. “Conclusions of the group of experts on health hazards and recommendations for reducing exposure of the population to RF electromagnetic fields” (English starts at page 7):
http://www.champagne-ardenne.sante.gouv.fr/ddass/fr/dd10/dossiers/bruit/www.sante.gouv.fr/htm/dossiers/telephon_mobil/pdf/chap_v.pdf
=== Excerpt ===
Page 08 of 12: “The group of experts recommend adopting an approach based on the precautionary principle to manage any potential risks associated with mobile telephony. (…) The general overall objective should be to reduce average exposure of the public to the lowest possible level compatible with service quality”
Page 09 of 12: “The group of experts recommend that ’sensitive’ buildings (hospitals, day care centers, and schools), located less than 100 metres from a macrocell base station, should not be directly in the path of the transmission beam.”
—3. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP):
http://www.icnirp.de/
—4. “Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields”, (ICNIRP):
http://www.icnirp.de/documents/emfgdl.pdf
=== Excerpt ===
Page 05: “Biological basis for limiting exposure (up to 100kHz)”
Page 11: “Biological basis for limiting exposure (100kHz-300GHz)”
Page 15: “Guidelines for limiting electro-magnetic field (EMF) exposure”
—5. “Exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields (100 kHz-300 GHz), biological effects and health consequences”, (ICNIRP):
http://www.icnirp.de/documents/RFReview.pdf
–
Pascal