Search news: View news by countries View all news

News for Canada

«First  ‹Previous   Page 13 of 13

Council opposes cell tower; Residents raise health concerns
Canada	Created: 20 Feb 2008
City council has thrown its support behind a group of residents fighting against the construction of a cellphone tower in a residential neighbourhood near Valleyview Drive. At planning committee last night, a divided council tentatively decided to tell Industry Canada - the federal department that regulates the telecommunications industry - that council doesn't want Telus Mobility to build a cellphone tower at 868 Valleyview Dr. That decision goes to the regular session of city council for final approval in two weeks. The tower could still be built even if council ratifies its decision. Industry Canada will have the final say in any dispute between Telus and the city. A representative for Telus told council the wireless communications company has heard the complaints from residents and will hold back the Valleyview Drive site until more work can be done. "We will go back to the public consultations phase and continue public consultations," said Stephen D'Agostino, a lawyer with Thomson Rogers law firm in Toronto. "Telus is a company that tries to develop things with consensus." Telus currently has applications before Industry Canada for three cellphone towers in Peterborough. There are towers planned for 42 Lansdowne St. W. and 1951 Lansdowne St. W. Coun. Jack Doris urged council to support the residents who oppose the Valleyview Drive site. "They're going to fight you to a standstill with their presentations and they're concerned about their health," Doris told the Telus representative. "Will you save everyone the pain of fighting this particular site?" D'Agostino assured council the wireless technology meets Health Canada standards and is safe. "We're all exposed to radio waves in our daily activities," he said. "There's radio in our lives all the time. "There is no evidence, no evidence by any peer reviewed study anywhere in the world ... there is no evidence that these towers cause health and safety situations." D'Agostino referred council to research presented by the Royal Society of Canada on its website, www.rsc.ca Magda Havas, a Trent University associate professor who argues against putting cellphone towers in residential areas, has pointed to research such as the bio-initiative report that can be found at www.bioinitiative.org Doris compared the concerns about wireless communications to the history of asbestos and certain chemical solvents that were once thought to be safe. "Electromagnetic emissions, there's a great variety of opinions from our learned society that says they're harmful," Doris said. Council is set to ask the Peterborough County-City Health Unit to provide information on the health effects of telecommunications. Telus may be forced to defend its selection of the Valleyview Drive site because of the vocal opposition by some residents, D'Agostino argued Other landlords won't take a tower once it becomes controversial, D'Agostino said. "They've essentially forced the carrier into a defensive position because they have nowhere to go," he said. Council asked staff to develop a protocol for how to consult with telecommunications companies about cellphone tower applications. The city can set its preference for issues such as the type of towers that are built in residential and industrial areas. Coun. Henry Clarke pointed out there are many different opinions on the effects of wireless communication. "If it's possibly dangerous to the people, then let's keep it out of the residential areas until we know more," he said. "Let's get the information from the health unit and let's exclude Valleyview." Coun. Bob Hall suggested the city may want to consider designating areas for cellphone tower construction in its secondary plans - documents that essentially serve as blueprints for growth. "This problem is not going to go away. It's going to increase," he said. "If these start popping up in residential neighbourhoods, there are going to be lots of concerns and lots of issues." City council doesn't have any say on abortion, euthanasia or wireless communications, Coun. Eric Martin said. "We're going outside the realm of what city council can and can't do," he said. "We're trying to make some points that we have no control over." Martin and councillors Shirley Eggleton, Ann Farquharson and Patti Peeters opposed the motion to tell Industry Canada that the city doesn't want a cellphone tower at the Valleyview Drive location.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Peterborough Examiner, BRENDAN WEDLEY, 20 Feb 2008

City has no power over cellphone towers
Canada	Created: 17 Feb 2008
The city has no authority when it comes to the installation of new cellphone towers, a staff report going to city council's planning committee on Tuesday concludes. There are now three applications from Telus Canada to set up new telecommunications towers in the city. The report states that Industry Canada makes all installation decisions because cellphones are federally regulated. New procedures adopted by Industry Canada Jan. 1 require public consultation with the affected local municipality, but those came into effect after Telus made its application in 2007. Some neighbours located near one proposed tower at 868 Valleyview Dr. have recently voiced concerns about possible health effect of electromagnetic emissions. The other two proposed towers, located at 42 and 1951 Lansdowne St. W. have "not generated any public reaction that staff are aware of," the report states. Representatives from Telus will be present at Tuesday's meeting, although they are under no obligation to, the report said. Staff have also been advised that Telus plans to meet with concerned property owners. Coun. Henry Clarke, who lives in Monaghan Ward where the proposed Valleyview Drive tower would be located, said he supports the neighbourhood. "They're upset about it and they're concerned and so we need to do what we can to address that." The biggest problem is the city has no control over the decision, he said. "We've got to find a way at making our opposition and displeasure very clear to the (federal government) so they're going to take a hard look at it." Planning committee chairwoman Ann Farquharson said councillors will have many questions for Telus and is happy representatives will be at the meeting. She also wants a map detailing where all cellphone towers are in the city. "Like anything else it's a relatively new technology that there may turn out to be medical issues or may not. It's the uncertainly," Farquharson said. "If we have no control that could be quite frustrating. That may be the case." Industry Canada says there are 13 cellphone stations already in the city. Steven Partridge, a Valleyview Drive resident, said he's not sure if he'll be at Tuesday's meeting "but for sure there will be a member of the community there."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Peterborough Examiner, FIONA ISAACSON, 16 Feb 2008

Calling all cell tower opponents
Canada	Created: 15 Feb 2008
I live in Simcoe, Ontario and we have been fighting a cell tower that is causing health problems for those living in the vicinity. One family had to abandon their home. It is a frustrating fight. First one has to get up to speed, which involves research as to who is involved and what their responsibility might be. Then there is the frustrating communications with local officials, Health Canada, Industry Canada and the industry. We've had local coverage, CBC news coverage, talks with MPs. Each time a local group becomes involved in this fight the same procedure happens. Slowly we are getting organized as we find others in similar situations. No longer do we take Health Canada, Industry Canada or the industry's word on anything because they just spout off without any evidence whatsoever. They have no evidence to prove electromagnetic ra-diation is safe. FRANK WOODCOCK Tyrell Street Simcoe
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Peterborough Examiner, Frank Woodcock, 15 Feb 2008

Modern communication technology could be making you sick
Canada	Created: 13 Feb 2008
The issue of cell phone towers has raised the hackles of several city residents and the planning department will present a report on the topic at next Tuesday's (Feb. 19) Planning Committee meeting. “Telus is in the process of trying to add two or three new wireless communications towers within Peterborough to intensify their cell phone network,” explains Malcolm Hunt, Peterborough planning department director. “One of those locations is called the Scottish Club property in the area of Valleyview north of Parkhill Road. That has triggered a flood of opposition.” The problem, notes Mr. Hunt, is that the City has no jurisdiction whatsoever on this issue. The telecommunication industry is government by the federal government. “I have spoken to a few individuals that have some concerns,” states MP Dean Del Mastro. In fact, our Member of Parliament has gone so far as to speak to Telus. “Telus has indicated to me that they will hold public consultations with concerned citizens about what impact a tower would have, if any.” But that's not quite the take Telus has on talks with the MP. "What we have agreed to do is speak with any residents who have a concern," notes James Kennedy, manager of real estate and government affairs for Telus. "We have already done extensive consultations." Mr. Kennedy estimates he's heard from "more than 10, less than 20" concerned city residents. He says compared to radio wave emissions people are already exposed to in their homes, emissions from a tower would constitute a drop in the bucket. Telus already has eight cell phone towers in Peterborough and plans to erect another three over the next two years. The effects of radio waves have been studied around the globe for years now. Check the internet and you'll find a plethora of sites warning of the dangers of radio wave emissions from cell phone towers. These emissions have been blamed for everything from chronic fatique to migraines to cancer, even to a herd of unproductive cows in Germany. That country's federal agency for radiation protection found that between 1994 and 2004 there was a threefold increase in newly developing cancer cases among people living withing 400 metres of a cell phone mast transmitter compared to those patients living further away. (To see this report go to http://omega.twoday.net/stories/398279/) But a report from the World Health Organization takes another stance. It states in part: “To date, no adverse health effects from low level, long-term exposure to radio frequency or power frequency fields have been confirmed, but scientists are actively continuing to research this area. Some members of the public have attributed a diffuse collection of symptoms to low levels of exposure to electromagnetic fields at home. Reported symptoms include headaches, anxiety, suicide and depression, nausea, fatigue and loss of libido. To date, scientific evidence does not support a link between these symptoms and exposure to electromagnetic fields. At least some of these health problems may be caused by noise or other factors in the environment, or by anxiety related to the presence of new technologies.” Councillor Jack Doris is very concerned about the unknowns of cell phone tower radio wave emissions. “I've been contacted by residents that live in the general area where the (Telus) tower is to be installed. This tower is 130 feet high and is to be built right in the middle of their properties and of course it's going to be used to relay cell phone calls causing electro-magnetic emissions. Now Telus says there's no problem, emissions are low and not a threat to your health. Well my point was, hello, that's what they said about pesticides.” Coun. Doris is hoping Mr. Hunt's report will at least lead to a motion to write Ottawa and demand input on the issue of cell phone towers being erected in the City. Donna Churipuy with the Peterborough County-City Health Unit says because this is a federal issue, and the local health unit is small, it needs to rely on research conducted in other areas. She tells Peterborough This Week the health unit is keeping an eye on how Toronto may deal with wireless towers and whether that health unit will come up with any sort of protocols. In 1999, the Toronto Board of Health adopted a “Prudent Avoidance Policy” for the location of new telecommunications towers and antennas. The policy recommended that levels of exposures to radio frequency for the general public be kept 100 times below Health Canada’s guidelines of 1,000 microwatts per square centimetre. MP Del Mastro feels that ultimately we take cell phone service for granted. “I know virtually no one who doesn't have a cell phone or a pager and in order to provide these services there have to be towers. The government of Canada and the governments of all the industrialized nations have looked into the potential side effects of the towers and we have to rely on their research to guide us moving forward.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Kawartha Media Group, 13 Feb 2008

Downtown Toronto new cell phone towers present a public health threat to area residents and workers
Canada	Created: 12 Feb 2008
I read with interest, The Canadian's article on "Cell Phone 'Towers Of Doom' that reportedly cause cancer in Britain now also threaten Toronto Communities." Link: http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2008/02/01/02182.html I am electro-hypersensitive (EHS) and on a recent trip to The Environmental Health Clinic at the New Women’s College Hospital in Toronto, was appalled to see the number of new cell phone towers along the QEW and the Gardiner Expressway. I am not sure of their locations but I did notice a cluster of apartment buildings directly across from one very large and heavily equipped tower. This was very distressing to me because I know that the thousands of people living in those apartment buildings are now under attack by life threatening forces. If you poll the residents in those buildings, it would not surprise me if you found that since those towers were erected, they have developed health problems including skin rashes, sleep disturbances, flu-like symptoms, moodiness, anxiety, depression, hyperactivity, headaches, vision problems, loss of concentration, memory loss, weakness, fatigue, heart problems, high or low blood pressure... the list goes on. A high number of them will develop cancer and other life threatening and debilitating illnesses. In the article Mr. Flet mentions that these towers cause cancer in England... they cause cancer where ever they are. Europe is far ahead of North America in its awareness of the dangers of this technology so you hear more, on the subject, from there. In Canada, there are thousands of people, like me, who cannot live 'normal' lives because we become extremely ill in the presence of wireless, electric, and electromagnetic sources. I am fortunate that I have been able to stay in my home but I know others who have been forced from their homes and are living in remote areas away from 'electrosmog'. We are "EMF/EMR refugees". (EMF - Electromagnetic fields, EMR - Electromagnetic radiation.) As I said before, I am fortunate to be able to stay in my home where I can better control my environment. I am fortunate in this aspect, but I cannot go out anywhere without the effects of EMF/EMR making me ill. I am also fortunate that my employer has been accommodating me to work from home for the last year because of the cell phone towers and wireless system installed on the property, but there are many who lose their jobs because of it. When I do venture out, it is for short periods and only when necessary. I have visited The Environmental Health Clinic at the New Womens' College Hospital in Toronto three times, and each time have needed a few weeks to recover from the drive there, being in Toronto, and the drive back. Along the highway from St. Catharines there are hundreds of these cell phone towers. Along any highway there are hundreds and quite often they are in clusters irradiating the area with overlapping signals that makes their effects worse. The proliferation of this technology anywhere and everywhere is making society sick. It is affecting wildlife and our environment. It is radiation and we all know the dangers of radiation. Why is this happening? Cell phone companies and governments are making money in the billions from this technology that isn't regulated in any way. Cell towers and other transmission devices are exempt from environmental assessment by Environment Canada. Canada's federal guidelines for radio frequency radiation (Safety Code 6) is based only on thermal effects of radiation and not biological effects. It was written in 1999 long before the proliferation of this technology. You don't need to look overseas to find communities fighting the cell phone companies. The war is on in Canada too but there is very little press coverage. The communications companies, specifically Rogers, have an interest in most of the news organizations. By law, you cannot even cite health issues when opposing these towers. You can only claim reduction in property values and aesthetic concerns! Independent research is overshadowed by funded research conducted for the cell phone companies because they have the means to publicize their 'no harm' results. If you haven't already done so, I suggest you read the Bioinitiative Report written by "An international working group of scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals (The BioInitiative Working Group)" http://www.bioinitiative.org The Canadian Human Rights Commission approved a Policy on Environmental Sensitivities on June 15th, 2007. In this policy, EHS is classified as an environmental sensitivity and therefore a disability. This is not only a public health issue; it is also an environmental and human rights issue that is being ignored by those in positions to help. How long was it before the government did anything about asbestos and cigarettes and how much damage was done in the mean time? The only difference between those issues and this is that this technology is more widespread and imposed on us whether we want it or not. There is no getting out of the vicinity of EMF/EMR. To do so, you have to travel to the most remote parts of the world. "Medical conditions are successfully treated using EMFs at levels below current public safety standards, proving another way that the body recognizes and responds to low-intensity EMF signals. Otherwise, these medical treatments could not work. The U.S. FDA has approved EMFs medical treatment devices, so is clearly aware of this paradox. No one would recommend that drugs used in medical treatments and prevention of disease be randomly given to the public, especially to children. Yet, random and involuntary exposures to EMFs occur all the time in daily life." (The BioInitiative Report) We need independent news organizations, like The Canadian, to tell it like it is and bring this to light.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Canadian National Newspape, Sue Parsons, 12 Feb 2008

Invisible fears; Neighbours worry new cellphone tower will affect their health
Canada	Created: 10 Feb 2008
Residents near Valleyview Drive are organizing to fight a telecommunications giant's plan to build a cellphone tower in their neighbourhood. They fear an onslaught of invisible electromagnetic emissions, which some residents believe may lead to health problems. Telus plans to build a tower on the Scottish Club property at 868 Valleyview Drive. Instead of a typical pyramid-style steel structure, the telecommunications equipment would be housed in a 42-metre tall flag pole. A Telus official told The Examiner the company follows Health Canada standards that are enforced by Industry Canada. It's a "myth" that cellphone towers cause health problems, the official said. But Steve Partridge doesn't believe the assurances from Telus. Partridge lives on Valleyview Drive with his wife, Jane Jopling, and their two sons, three-year-old William and one-year-old Jacob. The tower will be built practically in his backyard. "That kind of got me very concerned about the potential impact on our health, and my children's health and also property value. I don't think we can ignore that," Partridge said. "People don't like buying homes close to the hydro towers, so if the publicity about this issue continues to grow I think there's going to be a negative stigma attached to living close to these cell towers in residential areas." Telus sent a letter to nearby residents to tell them about the plan for the tower. It would be a 42-metre tall flag pole with a 14.3-square-metre shelter at the base. The tower would serve wireless phone coverage requirements for Telus Mobility for about the surrounding 10-kilometre radius, Telus senior planning specialist Alan Lee states. When Partridge received the letter, he started doing research. Now Partridge recites Industry Canada guidelines for cellphone towers and Health Canada regulations. Partridge discusses research on the subject by a Trent University professor. Health Canada's permissible emission rate, or level of emissions, is 1,000 microwatts per second; Austria regulations prohibit above 0.1, Partridge said. "If Austria thinks that their population is going to be harmed by levels above 0.1 microwatts per second, that's good enough for me," he said. Electromagnetic radiation can be produced by items such as electrical wires, computer monitors, light bulbs, cellphones, wireless phones and wireless Internet equipment. Partridge has a cellphone, but says he mostly uses it as an organizer and for text messages. "I don't use my cellphone 24 hours a day, and I'm not being hit with this radiation 24 hours a day, whereas with these towers they don't shut off. They're constantly emitting this electromagnetic radiation," he said. "In the data I've read, studies have shown cancer clusters, insomnia, people developing headaches, chronic fatigue, chronic pain. "Why are we risking exposing residents to this radiation? Why risk it when we've got plenty of open land that can be used that's not sitting in the middle of a residential neighbourhood, close to schools, close to hospitals?" There are 13 cellphone stations in the city, an Industry Canada online database shows. Several stations share sites - such as at 1925 Television Rd. where both Rogers Wireless Inc. and Telus have stations. There are cellphone stations in residential areas, such as at 630 Parkhill Rd., just east of Monaghan Road. There's one downtown at 212 Brock St. Valleyview Drive residents may be surprised to learn there's already a cellphone tower in their neighbourhood. Industry Canada records show there's a Rogers Wireless cellphone station at 1757 Parkhill, which is at Crowley Crescent, around the corner from where Partridge lives. There are more than 1,000 Telus cellphone stations in Ontario and 20 or fewer have been controversial, said James Kennedy, Telus real estate and government affairs manager. "Telus has its antennas on pretty much every hospital in Toronto, hundreds of residential buildings - completely and totally safe," he said. "There is certainly no evidence to suggest in any way that there are health effects from it. In fact, the overwhelming evidence from it is to the contrary. "There's a lot of misinformation. The problem is the science just doesn't back it up. "And yet the myth continues." Radio has been around for more than 100 years, Kennedy said. "It's the same technology," he said. Telus continues to build more cellphone stations to respond to customer demand. Kennedy explained Telus expects wireless phones, wireless cable and wireless Internet will replace land lines in the next 10 years. The tower on Valleyview Drive is scheduled for construction next year, Kennedy said. The plan needs to be approved by Industry Canada before construction can begin. Kennedy wouldn't say how far along this application process is or when Telus expects to get a decision from Industry Canada. Trent University associate professor Magda Havas argues against putting cellphone towers in residential areas. "They're harmful to people," she said. Havas has been doing research on radiation since the 1990s. She teaches a course on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields. While the cellphone industry respects Health Canada guidelines, the limits are too high, Havas said. "The problem is Safety Code 6 does not protect public health. That's based on a whole series of studies that have been done mostly in Europe," she said. "What they're showing is that there's an increased risk of cancers when you live within 400 metres of a cellphone antenna and there's increased symptoms of something that's known as electrohypersensitivity (EHS)." Havas listed a host of symptoms associated with EHS: insomnia, chronic fatigue, chronic pain, difficulty concentrating, difficulty with short-term memory, for some people their skin reacts with rashes, for some people it affects their eye sight and for some people it affects their hearing and they may get ringing in their ears. Havas explained Health Canada standards for electromagnetic radiation levels are based on thermal changes to the body - if it doesn't heat your body by one degree in six minutes, then it's safe. "You don't have to have heating, but you could still have a biological effect," she said. An international working group of scientists released a report on electromagnetic fields and health last year. The group found existing standards for public safety are inadequate to protect public health. It refers to scientific evidence, raising concerns about health impacts including childhood leukemia, brain tumours and Alzheimer's disease. The report can be found at http://www.bioinitiative.org Havas points to the bio-initiative report as one of the documents that supports her research. Electromagnetic field exposure is getting higher, increasing the number of people who are becoming very sensitive to the emissions, Havas said. "When it comes to antennas you're at a much lower level but a much longer exposure with cellphone towers because every time someone uses that cellphone antenna you're getting zapped to some degree," she said."One analogy is if you're using a cellphone it's like smoking and if you live near an antenna it's like inhaling second-hand smoke and we now know that second-hand smoke is harmful." Partridge has invited Havas to a neighbourhood meeting so his neighbours can hear about her research and findings. "The issue is not preventing cell towers from being built," he said. "It's being cautious about where they are placed and looking at the science and saying if there's an opportunity to keep it away from residential neighbourhoods where we will not be exposing people to this issue, then let's pursue that."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Peterborough Examiner, BRENDAN WEDLEY, 09 Feb 2008

Chelsea cellphone tower greeted with anger
Canada	Created: 9 Feb 2008
Chelsea residents want a new cellphone tower in their community closed until they can convince the federal government that such towers are a health hazard. The residents say they are part of a worldwide movement concerned about cellphone towers, or base stations, wireless computer communications and portable DECT phones. (DECT is a form of digital technology that allows a number of phones to share information.) Industry Canada figures show there are 1,001 cellphone antennas in Ottawa-Gatineau. Tower opponents say there is growing evidence linking the radiofrequency radiation produced by the antennas to cancer, sleep disturbances, headaches and psychological problems such as depression and anxiety. The World Health Organization, Health Canada and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection have concluded there is no convincing evidence that exposure to radio frequencies from cellphone towers shortens lifespans or induces or promotes cancer. The 76-metre cellphone tower near Highway 5 and Scott Road in Chelsea was erected in late 2007 without the approval of the municipal council or consultation with people living nearby. The tower is near Chelsea Elementary School, Ecole du Grand Boisé, a day-care centre and housing. Antenna opponent Christine MacDonald said cellphone towers have been blocked, or shut down, in Charlottetown, Britain and Taiwan because of public health concerns, including headaches, nausea and sleep problems. Residents couldn't agree on a location and the municipality refused to issue a building permit. But Industry Canada approved the site anyway because federal officials concluded it was in the national interest, according to Alain Côté, the official in charge of cellphone communication in Quebec. The tower's opponents say federal health regulations prevent people from being harmed by the heat generated by electromagnetic radiation, but the rules don't provide protection from the non-thermal effects of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields produced by the antennas. Health Canada spokeswoman Joey Rathwell said Canada's "Safety Code 6," which limits the emissions from cell towers to 1,000 microwatts per square centimetre, covers all biological effects, whether related to heating of tissues or to exposure levels too low to cause significant heating. "The non-thermal effects are not well established and currently do not form a scientifically acceptable basis for restricting human exposure to radio frequency fields," Ms. Rathwell said. But some experts say North American standards for cellphone communications do not adequately protect the public. Magda Havas, a professor of environmental science at Trent University in Peterborough, said the proliferation of wireless communications is "a human experiment on a massive scale exposing the worldwide population to radio frequency radiation without understanding the long-term biological and health consequences." Ms. Havas said people around the world have prevented the construction of cellphone towers and, in some cases, the communications industry has abandoned plans to build them because of public opposition. She said two Israeli health studies show an increased incidence of cancer among people who live near the towers. Ms. Havas also points out that guidelines for cellphone towers vary widely around the world. For example, the Austrian limit of 0.1 microwatts per square centimetre is 10,000 times lower than the Canadian limit of 1,000 microwatts. The Russian limit is 10 microwatts per square centimetre, for up to six minutes. "Canadian regulations are based on the heating effect," Ms. Havas said. "Cellphones and their towers won't cook you and that is the only thing that Canada cares about. "The Safety Code 6 limits don't even come close to keeping Canadians safe. The research done in other countries shows definitively that there are non-thermal effects from this type of radiation." Ms. Havas said the limits on cellphone tower emissions in former Eastern Bloc countries are much lower than they are in Canada or the U.S. because those countries conducted research on the use of microwave energy as a weapon after the Second World War. "They know what the harmful effects are," Ms. Havas said. "They know what frequencies are harmful and what the consequences are." But Health Canada's Ms. Rathwell said Canadian radiofrequency exposure limits are similar to those throughout North America and most of Europe. "Not all standards throughout the world have the same recommended exposure limits; some are more stringent than others," she said. "The variations of recommended limits may be attributed to differences in the philosophy, the methodology and the interpretation of scientific data used for standard development. "There is no scientific basis to support a conclusion that individuals living in countries with more stringent exposure standards receive a greater level of protection." Ms. Havas said portable DECT phones and computer Wi-Fi cards emit electromagnetic radiation because they use similar technology to cellphones. She wrote a study for the City of San Francisco indicating that Wi-Fi emissions could be harmful for computer users. "The real concern about Wi-Fi is for the person using the computer," Ms. Havas said. "The card receives radio frequencies and sends them to an antenna nearby. "The antenna in your computer is right in front of you. If you are sending to an antenna outside your building, your computer has to shout louder than if the antenna is nearby. With your computer, you are exposing your internal body organs, including your genitals, to electromagnetic radiation." Catherine Mullally, a writing professor at the University of Prince Edward Island, said Charlottetown residents recently convinced the city's council to reject a Rogers Wireless application to build a 40-metre tower within the city. "The more we read about these towers the more concerned we became," Ms. Mullally said. "It had all of the permissions it needed so we lobbied the city and they voted to block the tower in April 2007." She said the group relied on evidence gathered by the environmental health department at Lincoln University in Christchurch, New Zealand, which found radiofrequency microwave radiation is associated with reproductive problems and cancer. Ms. Mullally said such radiation is also thought to alter and impair brain function, disrupt sleep and learning processes, as well as hurt reaction times and harm the immune system. Dr. David Carpenter, an environmental health researcher at the University of Albany in New York, said some of the concerns about cellphone towers, Wi-Fi and cordless DECT phones are legitimate, but it remains to be proven that they are hazardous. A letter from the opponents of the Chelsea cellphone tower to Pontiac MP Lawrence Cannon said psychological changes such as depression are caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields that are 50 times below permissible levels. The letter said European studies found significantly higher rates of cancer among people living within 400 metres of the towers. "It is too bad that Health Canada is not willing to admit that there are problems," said Ms. MacDonald. "People aren't aware of this, but cellphone towers are coming down around the world. "This is a huge wake-up call for all of us." Karine White, a spokeswoman for Mr. Cannon's office, said constituency officials are willing to meet with Chelsea residents about the tower, but no date for a meeting has been set. Chelsea Mayor Jean Perras said he hopes federal officials will agree to a meeting in March.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Ottawa Citizen, Dave Rogers, 08 Feb 2008

U.S. doctor links radio waves from cell phone towers to cancer, Alzheimer’s, senility, dementia, Parkinson’s and Autism
Canada	Created: 8 Feb 2008
Unless you live in some unbelievably remote location, the odds are high that you’re being bombarded with information-carrying radio waves that can wreak havoc on your body. These radio waves have increased dramatically and exponentially over the last few years -- especially from cell phones, but also from WiFi, WiMax, BlueTooth, and other wireless devices. For most people, the damage from this 24-7 exposure will take years or even decades to surface since there is a lag time of five to 20 years for the health effects to become clinically apparent. For those unfortunate people in London, England, who were living directly below a major cell phone mast, the damage became apparent, sometime between the mast’s construction in 1994 and the beginning of the resident’s campaign to have the mast removed in 2002. You may not realize that you are likely living closer to a cell phone tower than you think. Cell “sites” can look like antennas or huge towers, but they can also be quite camouflaged. They exist on many schools, churches, firehouses, cemeteries and even in national parks. If you’re wondering why a school or park would want a cell site on their grounds, it’s because the cell phone companies pay to have them there, with fees that can range upwards of $2,000 a month. While there are already more than 175,000 cell towers in the United States (there is approximately 8,000 cell phone towers in Canada), this number is expected to increase by 48 percent to 260,000 by 2010, according to CTIA (the International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry). If you want to know just how close you are to a cell phone tower or antenna, simply type your location into AntennaSearch.com. It will tell you all of the towers (existing and future) and antennas that are within about ten kilometres of your address! Why are Increasing Cell Phone Towers so Concerning? What most people, including experts, fail to understand is that the danger from land-based portable phones, cell phones and WiFi routers is not from the magnetic radiation or the microwave carrier wave from which typical SAR ratings are given on phones. Unless you have massive exposures like you might expect in a microwave oven, these thermal effects are insignificant. Nearly all the biological damage comes from the modulated signals that are carried ON the carrier microwave. These modulated information-carrying radio waves resonate in biological frequencies of a few to a few hundred cycles per second, and can stimulate your vibrational cellular receptors causing a whole cascade of pathological consequences that can culminate in fatigue, anxiety and ultimately cancers. Again, this is a very serious concern because, unless you live in an isolated rural setting, you are probably being exposed to these radio-waves day-in and day-out -- whether or not you even own or use a cell phone. Numerous studies have linked exposure to information-carrying radio waves to health problems, but you may not realize that your symptoms are related to these radio frequencies because they could easily be attributed to other causes as well. Aside from cancer and brain tumours, cells phones and other radio frequencies can cause: -- Alzheimer’s, senility and dementia -- Parkinson’s -- Autism -- Headaches -- Sleep disruptions and fatigue -- Altered memory function, poor concentration and spatial awareness Can You Hear Me Now? The Truth the Cell Phone Industry Doesn’t Want You to Hear One of the world’s undisputed experts in cell phone safety is Dr. George Carlo, and I had the privilege of spending two full days with him in October 2007. I was so compelled with the information I heard that my next book, slated for release in 2009, will detail the reasons why I believe using cell phones is far more dangerous than smoking cigarettes ever was. In the 1990s, Dr. Carlo was given a $28-million grant from the cell phone industry to put an end to the talk that cell phones were hazardous to your health. Unfortunately, what he found was not what he’d been paid to find. Instead, he discovered that they DO, in fact, cause damage. The cell phone industry offered him a position for $1 million a year to silence him, but he refused, and started a non-profit institute called The Safe Wireless Initiative to inform the world of this danger instead. I highly recommend you check out his site as he has compiled excellent resources on interventions you can use to maximize your health and minimize your risks. I also tried to spread the word about the dangers of cell phones via a Today Show interview I did last year. Well, they only aired four seconds of my 20-minute interview, completely censoring the supporting evidence that cell phones can cause damage. Tips to Limit Your Damage from Information-Carrying Radio Waves There quite simply is no safe biological threshold for exposure to information-carrying radio waves, and there is, quite honestly, little you can do to avoid them 100 percent. But you can reduce your, and your family’s, exposure by taking the following commonsense precautions: Limit the amount of time you spend on a cell phone or cordless phone. Use a wired headset to limit your exposure to the cell phone -- ideally, an air tube headset that conducts sound but prevents any radiation from traveling up the wire to your brain. Also make sure the wire is SHIELDED, which prevents the wire from acting as an antenna that could attract more information-carrying radio waves directly to your brain. Wireless BlueTooth headsets should be avoided. Limit your exposure to WiFi routers. Find out where they are located in your work environment and stay away from them. If you have any land-based (non-cellular) portable phones, do NOT use anything other than the 900 MHz phones as the Gigahertz phones stay on continuously, blasting you with information-carrying radio waves 24/7. Use the speakerphone instead of putting the phone to your ear; this is probably one of the single most important steps you can take other than not using your cell phone. Limit calls inside buildings. Use the phone in open spaces as often as possible. Limit use by children and preadolescents, or don’t let them use cell phones at all. Children’s developing nervous systems and thinner skulls are simply too vulnerable to cell phone damage. About the writer: Dr. Joseph Mercola, is a physician, health activist, and entrepreneur practicing near Chicago. He is the author of two New York Times<.i> best-sellers, The No-Grain Diet co-authored with Alison Rose Levy, and The Great Bird Flu Hoax, together with several other books. He is the founder and editor of Mercola.com.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Canadian National Newspaper, Dr. Joseph Mercola, 08 Feb 2008

Cell Phone ‘Towers Of Doom’ that reportedly cause cancer in Britain now also threaten Toronto Communities
Canada	Created: 4 Feb 2008
Toronto's Gardiner Expressway has recently seen a series of looming cell phone towers - These towers have been erected without warning to local downtown workers and nearby residents. There is also another tower at Finch and Victoria Park about 7 metres from apartment buildings windows that is virtually identical to the Orange Phone Company Tower that has become infamous for reports of accompanying cancer ailments by residents. Backgrounder to the soaring cell phone tower related cancers in Britain England’s Orange phone company is being required to remove mobile mast from 'tower of doom', where the cancer rate has soared. A British mobile phone company is to remove a mast from a block of flats after seven residents were struck down by cancer. Three have died and another four have battled the disease since two masts were erected on the roof of the five-storey block which has become known locally in Britain as the Tower of Doom. The cancer rate on the top floor -- where residents of five of the eight flats have been affected and the three who died all lived - is 20%, ten times the national average. Residents of Berkeley House in Staple Hill, Bristol, also complain of terrible headaches and other ailments which they blame on radiation from the masts. Orange has agreed to remove its mast after a five-year campaign by residents and pressure from the local authority. But it has caused anger with plans to move it to a residential street nearby. The other mast belongs to Vodafone, which has no plans to move it. The most recent death was that of John Llewellin, 63, who lost his battle against bowel cancer two weeks ago. Two years ago, Barbara Wood died in her 70s from breast cancer. Two years earlier Joyce Davies died, also from breast cancer. Danger zone Residents at this Bristol flat have suffered illness and death The other victims on the top floor are Hazel Frape, 63, who has had breast cancer, and 89-year-old Phyllis Smith who moved out after she contracted the same disease. On the fourth floor Bernice Mitchell, 69, has battled womb cancer. On the second floor, 78-year-old Barbara Watts, who has lived in the block for 31 years, is in remission from breast cancer. Many of the 110 residents, including Doreen Sheppard, 74, have complained of headaches and other health problems. She said: "The masts are bound to be doing something. I get terrible headaches and I've started suffering from Meniere's disease, where I lose my balance. I'm worried about the children on the estate as there are so many of them now." Both masts were erected in 1994. South Gloucestershire Council served a notice asking for them to be removed when the ten-year contract expired three years ago. But because current guidelines say there is no risk from radiation the council does not have a legal right to force their removal. After a long legal battle Orange has submitted a planning application to put the mast on top of a shopping precinct in a street near homes, a primary school and a public library. Jeanette McCormack, 69, who has led a campaign against the mast, said a petition against the new location had gathered more than 200 names. She added: "People of all ages who live and work near the mast will be exposed to the radiation and so there's a lot of anger about it."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Toronto Street News, Victor Flet, 02 Feb 2008

Survey: Energy Efficient Light bulbs and your Health
Canada	Created: 30 Jan 2008
Could you please complete the survey (link below). It will take less than 10 minutes of your time. And please circulate this to your email distribution list and to those with electrical sensitivity. The more responses we receive the more useful will be the survey. Feel free to circulate this to people who suffer from migraines, skin irritations, epilepsy, and other neurological disorders like MS, Parkinsons, ALS, ADD, autism, etc. Thanks for your help, -magda havas _____ We are conducting a survey to determine how electrically sensitive people respond to different types of lights. To complete the survey please click on the link below. http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=VkdIkehezJsP0zX4CyQ5QQ_3d_3d This survey has 8 questions and can be answered quickly. Please answer EVERY question or you will not be able to submit your response. You can opt out of the survey at any time and the survey will NOT be submitted. Individuals cannot be identified and all response are confidential. The results of the survey, which should be available by the end of February, will be sent to various websites for posting.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Magda Havas

«First  ‹Previous   Page 13 of 13

News item: