- Forums - Sign Up - Reply - Search - Statistics -
www.mast-victims.org forum / General discussion / How Bicton BEAT the Tetra Mast! Advice to other community groups fighting mast applications.
Author Message
agnes
# Posted: 18 Jul 2008 02:05
Reply 


What we did to get the proposed Tetra mast in Bicton turned down!

Firstly we formed a group, three families, we had all received letters about the proposal from the planning office. Luckily for us one member of the group had plenty of experience with planning issues. I would advise anyone who is going through this to find someone who really knows the ins and outs of planning. We also found the advise and support from David Baron extremely helpful.

My first job was to start a petition, even though it only counts as one object, it gave me the chance to speak to nearly everyone in the area.
I gave out a leaflet with a map of the area, the mast site marked on it and a circle measuring out 600m from the mast. This helped a lot, as some neighbours felt the mast was nowhere near their house. Also we put a little bit of info about Tetra and website addresses for mast sanity,
mast victims and tetra watch.

We contacted all the local schools (4 within 480m of the mast). They had not heard or been informed about the mast either. Each school sent out
letters to the parents informing them of the proposal and gave out website addresses for Tetra watch etc. They also asked parents to right
objections to the planning office.

We contacted every business in the area to inform them and ask them to write objection letters too.

At first we didn't have much luck with our MP as it wasn't something his office thought he could deal with. so we asked villagers to email him,
our borough and county councillors, local news papers and the MP.
This worked and The MP came out to the proposed mast site. We had over a hundred villagers at an hours notice to meet with him their. We took
photos and sent them into the local press.

Because this mast site would have been so close to cattle contained in a very large shed, we contacted The RSPCA, VIVA and other local animal
rights groups. They all wrote to the planning office and the farmer allowing the mast.

We held a public meeting within a week of finding out about the plans, again taking leaflets to each and every house hold. We had over 200
people turn up on the night. First we explained what tetra was and how it worked. Then someone else went though the health issues connected to
masts. Then on to the planning application it's self, focusing on the mistakes Airwaves had made and lack of consultation. That night we again
asked everyone to write objections. I also helped out people who didn't know what to write.

We got in touch with friends of the earth. They had a lot on at the time, but helped by writing objections. The mast was very close to a SSSI.

We held a protest in our town centre, outside the O2 shop (on the day the new iphone 3G went on sale). Our MP turned up and about 50
residents, with banners, handing out leaflets about Tetra. Local press were there and we made the front page, with a great picture.

The final step was to get as many people as possible to attend the planning meeting. We had over a hundred residents, again with banners
etc. The local radio station came along and did an interview.

We had a speaker for our 3 minute speech at the meeting. He didn't raise any health issues as this is not a consideration for the planning
committee. He just spoke about the mistakes in the application and mainly pointed out that there was an existing site that gave better
coverage and wasn't near any homes. The vote to refuse the mast was unanimous.

This is just part of this campaign, other members of the group dealt with the planning application, going through it and noting any weak
points and mistakes. Other members of the group were constantly on the phone to anyone who could help. It was more than a full time job, it
really takes over your life and i can't imagine how i would feel right now if the application and gone though.
Eleanor Howells. Bicton. Shropshire.

If you want to read about the start of the Bicton story it is here:
http://www.shropshirestar.com/2008/07/09/angry-villagers-in-fear-of-health-risk/
http://mast-victims.org/index.php?content=news&action=view&type=newsitem&id=3256

Bryan
# Posted: 18 Jul 2008 13:37
Reply 


Agnes,
I find this shocking on so many levels. The disservice you have done to this community is unbelievable. You have not only left them worried about something for no reason at all but you have deprived them of potentially life critical communications. How on earth can you justify such crass unthinking behaviour is utterly beyond my comprehension?

I do so wish I'd been at that public meeting when you attempted to explain what TETRA is and how it works. You never seem to display any knowledge about it on this website, so where did you get the information from in the meeting? I'm horrified that the schools allowed you to circulate your misguided propaganda to all those parents. That is a disgrace and the schools should be disciplined by the education authority.

And I'm mystified as to why you held your protest outside an O2 shop. Didn't you know that O2 don't own Airwave anymore? Or do you just not know the difference between GSM and TETRA?

Please tell me that the RSPCA weren't interested in your crazy plan. Are we to have a campaign to ban base sites form farms now?

Once or twice on this website people have asked me why I'm angry about this and I've assured them that I'm not angry. Well Agnes you have changed that. Reading this made me both angry and sad. Sad for the people in the community and angry that someone would do such a ridiculous thing. I hope you can feel as smug about it the next time someone dies there because the communication links fail for the ambulance or police force. Your rather eccentric opinions on this website may be mildly amusing but when you start to put real people's lives at risk then it is no longer a joke. This is a serious and very dangerous thing you have done. I urge you to think very hard before you attempt anything as stupid as this again.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 18 Jul 2008 15:42
Reply 


Bryan,

If you bothered reading the news, then you would know that it wasn't Agnes that did anything. She just posted a letter from the leaders of the Bicton campaign here resulting in her name showing as the poster.

Bryan, I'm sorry that you are getting all upset and misrable about this since I now know through your posts here that you are a very emotional and sensitive guy - but let me tell you that two people in Denmark have already died due to TETRA malfunctioning in emergency situations. The ambulance driver that blamed TETRA was fired to cover up the scandal. Also a UK policeman has died because of health complications resulting from exposure from his TETRA handset (yes, the radiation). If you follow the news, I'm sure you've heard about this.

The RSPCA care about animals and there have been numerous accounts (and even real scientific studies) where farm animals got sick after basestations on the farm land have been switched on. But hey, those animals must be all psychosomatic.

The emergency services did fine before TETRA was forced upon them by firestation and hospital bosses golfing with Motorola execs. The Swedish policemens association don't want TETRA because of a). it breaks down b). they are sceptical of it's safety (yes, the radiation).

/Henrik

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 18 Jul 2008 22:16
Reply 


Bryan,

Here are the articles I'm talking about in my previous post (with google translation from danish/swedish to english):

Sweden:
"Police officers are concerned about Rakelstrċlning (TETRA-radiation)"

Denmark:
"Tetra-criticism costing fireman job"

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 18 Jul 2008 22:18
Reply 


and more:

Sweden:
google translation gagged on the source article for this one so here is our translation:
"Swedish Police Federation sceptical about TETRA health safety"

UK:
and this one is old and I guess the original article is long gone from the source website, but as always it's copied verbatim into our news section:
"OFFICER reveals health fears for TETRA"

Elliot
Member
# Posted: 18 Jul 2008 22:25
Reply 


Bryan,

I am a Bicton resident and one of the campaigners mentioned in Agnes's post, I hope to answer your post as best I can.

TETRA may seem to offer 'life critical communciations' but in reality it is another in a long list of subcontracted cock-ups. It doesn't perfrom as it ought, it harms it users and it was rolled out before it had any kind of testing or indeed proper support - the radios used by the forces previously have been sidelined before the TETRA is even fully functional - I find it hard to believe you think this is our decision and our fault ?!? My father worked in the industry for many years and had serious concerns over microwave comms, particularly TETRA. There is not and has never been a blackspot where we live - I know someone who works for the Police in a radio technical roll and he can confirm this, so could the two officers who came to our house after my wife was assaulted trying to hand out leaflets about this issue.

The RSPCA ARE very concerned about TETRA and it's effects on animals for good reason. The wealth of research is available to everyone with a PC and the will to find it - I suggest you try.

We are not conspiracy theorists or NIMBY's - there are many developments I would be happy to support in my community, a mast that actually causes chronic ilnness and death is not one - the Vatican have just been taken to court and lost because they use this technology, we are all about to discover the truth of the matter, just as soon as the mobile phone companies let us (this might be a task as they are currently making billions out of our obsession).

I hope I have not made you angry reading this, because I can tell you it is not often I have felt as bullied and in fear for my childrens lives as I did when we were threatened with TETRA - please, I urge you, read Barry Trower's report again and digest - Mr Trower is not an idiot and he thinks this is extremely dangerous.

Go and ask a copper, most don't think TETRA is good, it would stop me from joining the force, and please save the petty insults, they do you no favours.

Can I just ask you why you think our suggestion that the preferred site (away from all dwellings) was the better one, rather than a new site in the middle of a thriving village ?!? Our site offered only adequate coverage wheras the existing site (a mast share) offered complete - to be honest it beggars belief that our site was even considered - it's madness.

I look forward to your reply.

Kindest regards, Elliot.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 19 Jul 2008 13:00
Reply 


The Trower report can be found here at the TetraWatch website.

Bryan
# Posted: 21 Jul 2008 14:58
Reply 


To all whom it may concern.

Firstly, I must assure you that I absolutely stand by everything that I have already said. You (collective you) are so wrong for so many reasons I hardly know where to start. Nevertheless, it is clear that I do have one apology to make. Henrik is right, as usual, that I have misattributed the original post. Sorry Agnes, it is clearly Eleanor and Elliot who are in need of a cold shower to bring them to their senses.

I simply don't believe that a police officer, or anyone else for that matter, has died because of TETRA. The suggestion is so ridiculous that it doesn't even justify comment about why it's ridiculous. As for the Danish ambulance driver, well it is impossible to engineer a radio system that is 100% resilient to failure. I absolutely guarantee that TETRA is much more resilient to failure than any system that has preceded it. If this chap made a big song and dance about an isolated publically, especially if it included the health myths, then that would seem to me a professional breach that would deserve a termination of contract.

Quoting one instance where communication failed in a TETRA network reminds me a little of the seatbelt debate we had in the UK a couple of decades ago. Those who opposed the compulsory wearing of seatbelts would quote obscure circumstances where it was believed that people had died or been injured 'because' they were wearing seatbelts. They would conveniently forget the tens of thousands of lives saved by seatbelts. It strikes me that you are trying to do the same thing here with TETRA. This brings me to the next very important point.

I don't know how you formed the opinion that the police, fire and ambulance services were doing just fine with their existing radio systems, but it is quite wrong. Their legacy radio systems were decades out of date and extremely unreliable. The systems were an ad hoc mixture of wholly incompatible UHF and VHF radios. There was no coordination between adjacent authorities. The number of communication channels was very limited, which leads to very confused communications as multiple different incidents had to be dealt with simultaneously on a single channel. Also, the analogue systems were completely insecure. Every criminal and their dog was listening to everything the police did. It reached a point in the UK where police officers were actually prohibited from using their radios at all, instead relying on their mobile phones. Frankly in the UK there was better radio kit fitted in the taxis than there was in police cars. Into this quagmire of patched together radio equipment comes TETRA, not perfect I admit, but an enormous improvement on the equipment it is replacing. TETRA also provides a better basis for future development and hopefully the rollout of TETRA II will start soon bringing real data capability that will revolutionise the resources available to ambulance and fire crews particularly.

Contrary to Elliot's opinion that TETRA has been rushed out too soon, I'd say it has arrived ten years too late. And contrary to Henrik's opinion that it was foisted on us by Motorola, the opposite is true, Motorola had it foisted upon them. If it had been down to Motorola they would have used their own technology, called iDEN. Besides, Motorola is far from the only supplier of TETRA equipment.

I think Elliot is being rather unfair to Airwave in describing their efforts as just another subcontracted cock-up. I think they have done a very impressive job in rolling out a national network so quickly and especially in achieving such stability with a new technology.

As regards the proposed development of a new mast in the village, Elliot raises some interesting points. I can do no more than speculate about this particular instance but I can give some reasons why Airwave might pick one location over another. Engineering always involves achieving an acceptable balance between often conflicting considerations. If I'm reading what you write correctly you are saying that there is already TETRA coverage in the village from an existing shared radio site outside the village or that you think there was an option to use such a site, I'm not sure which. Either way I can certainly understand why you would be sceptical about the need for a site in the village. However, there are many possible reasons for this. Of course a basic consideration for the positioning of a radio site is that it provides the required radio coverage. In this respect it could be that the existing shared site does not provide reliable enough coverage across the whole village, or it may even be that the area of poor coverage is not in the village at all but is in the surrounding countryside somewhere. It is possible therefore that any required fill-in coverage cannot be provided from the shared site location. Another possible reason relates to capacity. Providing a strong enough signal footprint is not enough, there must also be sufficient channel available in the radio system to carry the localised traffic. It could be that the shared site would be too near its capacity limit and that the village site will be used to add capacity rather than coverage. There are also many practical considerations. Placing sites in rural areas creates many logistical problems, for example, finding a suitable power supply and what we call backhaul, that is, building the link from the base station back into the system. There also needs to be sufficient space for all the equipment associated with a base station, which is probably a lot bigger than you think. Remember also that commissioning and maintenance engineers will need to visit the site frequently and this can be very difficult if the site is deep in farmland, again a village location provides more reliable access; particularly important with a safety-critical system. Whatever the reasons for Airwave wanting this site, it is not just to cause distress for you and your family. A TETRA base station represents a very substantial financial investment, perhaps between a quarter and half a million pounds CAPEX and civils and then the same again in OPEX over the next few years. They really would not try to build it if they weren't very sure they needed it. Airwave does not have access to the kind of returns on investment that mobile phone operators do, they will be very careful about where and how many sites they build.

I do talk to 'coppers' about TETRA. I do not agree that most don't like TETRA, although it is true that some don't like it. However, some of them don't like the Volvos they drive up and down the motorways either and there are plenty of people would disagree with that too.

Slightly off point here; there are some very dedicated individuals working for the RSPCA, but the organisation as a whole is in my opinion driven more by political motives rather than by animal welfare considerations. Its own self righteousness tends to blind it to sensible considered judgement. For example, the RSPCA supported the ban on foxhunting and they oppose the culling of badgers. In a wider sphere they also oppose bullfighting. This might at first seem an obvious stance for such an organisations to take, but in fact it just shows a lack of understanding about the true nature of animal welfare. Anyone who is familiar with any of these things knows that they are all in fact about promoting animal welfare. Their stance on these issues and many others must therefore be assumed to be based on considerations other than animal welfare or else on ignorance. It should not surprise me then that they might relish an issue like TETRA without giving it proper balanced consideration. As for the psychosomatic animals, they would need to be ill first, and they are not. Perhaps that's because they can't read all these so called reports telling them that they should be ill.

I am still angry Elliot, and I am angry on your behalf. I'm angry that you have had to waste your valuable time on this. I'm angry that the residents in your village will have a substandard service. I'm also angry that unnecessarily you have been made to feel 'bullied and in fear of your children's lives'. Those are strong words, and that you are suffering like that over such a pointless issue is very sad indeed. I am sorry.

Finally, Trower might not be an idiot, but that doesn't make him right.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 22 Jul 2008 13:42
Reply 


Bryan,

Wow, that was a long post there. Very interesting. I'm not going to get into every point you made though. One thing I'm a bit tired of is your "you are so wrong for so many reasons" bit. How constructive is that? Either give us a list or stop that "I'm so right and so misunderstood" crap.

You are probably right about all the little details about who got weaseled into what contracts and why. I don't have frontline access to all the inside industry gossip, but you do.
If you would stick a few references into your posts, like newspaper articles etc. then your claims would gain some weight. From reading about the Danish case I got the clear impression the Motorola had been courting Mayors and health/emergency bosses here and there to gain support for TETRA. Maybe that's just business as usual in your industry.

Let me put one thing straight: no-one would object to a emergency/health service enhancement if it wasn't based on a health hazardous technology.
It's not the concept of mobile comms. that's under fire here, it's the careless implementation.
We will probably never agree on this...
But still, no member of your industry has ever provided evidence upfront that these modes of transmission are not health damaging. Other industries are required to provide pre-market evidence of safety. Mobile comm. never have done that. Instead evidence of harm mounts inside laboratories and out "in the field" - and nobody with an ounce of responsibilty want's to go near this controversy - so nothing gets done and so the catastrophy will blow up in our faces within a few years. We will all pay dearly.
I don't expect you to agree to that either.
And know what? You industry people fascinate me completely. You would rather paint the room in elephant-colour so you won't have to notice that elephant standing in the corner.

Agnes
# Posted: 23 Jul 2008 05:02
Reply 


Bryan.
I know you are a Very frequent guest (supplier of opininon) at my website.
I have no idea why, as you dissagree with all we stand for.

But I must say, I am amazed you got your knickers in a such a twist in a massive way, over Eleanor Howells letter to me about "How Bicton Beat The Mast".
Bicton village did a super job, I am dead proud of them. I did what I could to help them, but all their hard work and their sucess is at their own, wise account.
And you have read Elliots account I am sure, He is one of Them!
And remember, all Bicton villagers concerns were about protecting their youngs and themselves , they had No Concern what-so-ever for the Cashflow of the Mobile Telecommunications industry.

So, I feel quite sorry for you.
I guess Henrik is right about you being emotional, and misguided if you ask me. But then we have opposite opinions.

Well, I am quite emotional as well.

The big difference seems to be that, I get emotional over ABUSE against HUMANS and their children, and animals and their youngs where it hurts, and believe you me I know LOADS about what the Microwave Radiation from Telecommunications Equipment does to the human, and dog anatomy!
In 2003 the same (3G) radiation rendered me and my family + dog HOMELESS.
If you do not believe me Google my name "Agnes Ingvarsdottir"
That fact is the sole reason for the existance of www.mast-victims.org!

(As informed as you seem to be about the microwave radiation telephone technology, you will know Im sure, that Tetra and 3G are very similar, and cause the same healthproblems in humans)

I have No Compassion whatsoever for the greedy telecommunications industry, who get their cash at the cost of abuse to our our health.
But, what they are forgetting is, that in the way they operate and install their masts in the Very Near vicinity of human residences, schools and workplaces they are also making sure they are ridding them selves of customers.
I know no-one, including myself and my family, who has been a near neighbour to a mast installation, who can use a mobile phone anymore, we cannot even come near to people carrying one.

Just think of the consequences of that on your life:
You can only live where there are no masts near by!
You can only shop where there are no masts near, no RFID, and at times when others carrying mobiles are elsewhere!
If your neighbour buys a DECT phone and is unvilling to change back to wired phone, even if you offer to pay for one you have to protect yourself and your remaining health by carbon painting on your inside walls and hang lead or silver coated net-curtains for your windows! Both home and offices!
A town or city with Wi-Fi is out of bounds!
You cannot drive down the motorway!
You cannot go into an airport because of their Wi-Fi, let alone fly on a business trip your livelihood depends on, as does that of your employees!

So, I Savour Black Spots.
They are the only places where I can go these days.

To add to your misery I can tell you that two years ago there was an application for a telecommunications mast in the middle of my village of Colwall. (you can find it on Multi-map Im sure)
We were told this was totally necessary, as the village was a Black Spot.
(It was Curious to find out (by asking) that the people who had phones from that peticular company had excellant signal)
Anyway, I started a petition, got over 10% of the village peoples objecting, and many letters as well, in the short time we were give to object.

The company got planning permission by the county council.
Our petition was disregarded!
But, To this day there has not been a mast installed in the middle of the village.
The company has again applied for and got planning permission for a mast, far outside of the village on an existing mast they had discounted as totally unsuitable in the first application.
This installation is in the process of beeing erected.
Why?
In the first application it was unusable!
In the second, maybe because of the massive objection, IT WAS FINE!
Black Spots, Yes, Pull the other JOKE!
Profits, yes!
Regards.
Agnes Ingvarsdottir.
www.mast-victims.org

Bryan
# Posted: 24 Jul 2008 18:22
Reply 


Yes I'm quite prepared to believe that bribes of one kind or another have been used to get telecoms industry contracts. They will I am sure range from the occasional free lunch and good bottle of wine to more substantial backhanders. I won't say that I support such things, but I will say that I don't think this is a criticism that it is in any way fair to level at the telecoms industry in particular. Can you think of any large industry where this sort of thing doesn't happen? Henrik's link was to a story about Siemens. This is a large company, but not one with a very significant impact on the industry sector in which I work, certainly not compared to Nokia, Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, Motorola, ZTE or Huawei. I think of Siemens as more of a heavy engineering company. They make a lot of trains for example, that's a good thing isn't it. Does the fact that they have been caught out giving brides mean that the train industry is also greedy and hell bent on killing its customers? The telecoms industry is no worse or no better than any other industry. The people in it are quite normal and in my experience very pleasant individuals. It is quite unfair to suggest that those in the industry have no thoughts for humanity.

I find it rather odd that Agnes would say she cares about humans and then a few sentences later says that she has no compassion whatsoever for the greedy telecoms industry. Are we not humans too?

TETRA and 3G are not similar, apart from the fact that they both utilize radio they are completely different technologies. And I'm sorry Agnes but I don't believe that your troubles have anything to do with radio technologies. I don't believe that you can't be around any radio equipment nor that you can detect your neighbour's DECT phone nor someone carrying a mobile nor indeed RFID equipment. Where do you go that is what you describe as a Black Spot? What about TV broadcast signals, Radar systems and Satellite transmissions? Why don't these affect you?

I am also amazed that Agnes says that everyone she knows who has lived near a mast has had problems. I'm afraid that I don't believe that either. I have never met a single person that has had a problem with RF radiation. How do you define 'near' to a mast anyway? For example there can't be anyone living in a city anywhere in Europe who is more than 500m from their nearest mast and probably 70% will be living within 100m of the nearest mast. Are they all ill?

Henrik I know you are fed up with my generalised statements and lack of quotes. I promise you that I don't do it just to wind you up. I just don't have the time or dedication that you have and are prepared to spend in this topic. Sorry in advance for the irritation that future examples will no doubt cause.

Agnes, I don't doubt your compassion. You do obviously care deeply about this and for the people who you believe are being harmed. I just think you are wrong that's all. It is precisely because I disagree with the views on this site that I write on it.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 25 Jul 2008 15:44
Reply 


Bryan,

I'm sure your colleagues are lovely people but something seems to happen with people encapsulated within the collective mind of a corporation like those that make up your industry. For example, I did some consulting work for a marketing department. I noticed along the way that they used completely ruthless tactics to win customers and that they had invented a special "language" in order to conceal, from themselves, the fact that every "rat in the trap" was in fact a living, breathing human being. As individuals they were nice people but their "work mindset" was rather disgusting. I guess it's some sort of psychological coping mechanism.
Your industry has similar ways of coping. Your industry clings to outdated "safety guidelines" that reduce the whole complex deal of biological effects from EMF down to one simple parameter: heat, from sheer intensity.
By doing so every valuable bit of information of how EMF can harm and heal is just flushed down the drain because the telecom industry just can't handle the thought of it's emissions having any biological effect at all.
(Yes I wrote "heal" because there is a lot of research going on using subtle EMF as medicin). Anyway, that's what I meant with "painting the room elephant-colour so you won't have to notice the elephant".
And of course the very idea of your products and emissions being harmful is a direct threat to the corporations lifeblood: profit. So the collective hivemind of the corporate beast lapses into blind denial in order to survive, at least psychologically.

I'm very aware that TETRA & 3G are not similar. I'd say that TETRA is far worse then 3G because of it's clear pulse-modulation (or "burst", take your pick).
Somehow the NRPB once said that "TETRA doesn't pulse" - do you agree with them?
Agnes is not a technician, but just a person who found out, the very hard way, that certain wireless technologies have a detrimental effect on her health.
Notice I wrote "certain". Your reference to "all the other" sources of EMF tells me that you are suffering from the hivemind blind by boiling everything down to one parameter: intensity.
What the ICNIRP have done is reduce the beautiful super-complexity of our biology into a model the resembles a bag of Minestrone soup. Well, the ICNIRP chairperson is Italian so that's really no surprize.
You can irradiate soup and measure the heating but that soup ain't alive and soup doesn't have to rely on subtle electrical forces to keep all it's beautiful super-complexity under strict control.
How do you like to be looked upon as a bag of soup!? Don't you think you deserve better? I digress.
Rule of thumb seems to be that the more coherent the signal modulation, the more likely for short-term adverse effects to develop. This is often blamed on calcium-efflux. Look up Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy for more on that.
You mention TV and radio broadcast systems. Most of these signals seem to be rather "changing" in nature as the modulation reflects the in-coherent source, like moving images and speech, though I admit I have not looked much into digital TV and radio yet. Well, ever heard about "noise-field" technology? I suggest you look it up. It was born out of US military research in reponse to radar operator getting sick. It's a method of mitigating adverse effects from coherent EMF signals by super-imposing a randomly fluctuating signal on top of it. This seems to lessen cells reactions to the coherently modulated signal. Look up Theodore Litovitz and his work.
I'll give you an anecdote from personal experience. It's not "science" and you can write it off as entertainment if you wish, but here goes:
I witnessed this "noise-field" effect in action by standing 1 mile from the tallest radio broadcast antenna in Denmark (I measured 1 milliWatt/m2 on the ground) while at the same times being near a DECT basestation (giving off 150 microWatt/m2) and I didn't feel the DECT as bad as I usually do. Felt a bit dizzy though, but nothing near the usual. The constantly changing FM modulation seemed to migitate/mask the coherently pulsing DECT basestation signal.
According to Swedish research (see here & here), being constantly exposed to FM radio does not save you from cancer though, but it does seem to lessen the short-term effects.

/Henrik

Bryan
# Posted: 25 Jul 2008 18:12
Reply 


The soup isn't alive? Depends on the restaurant I guess! 

Actually, I understand, sympathise with and even agree with quite a lot of what you say here.

For a start I recognise the ruthless business attitude you describe Henrik and I'm no fan of it either. It's true of any business though isn't it? Even so, nobody I know would ever promote something that they really believed was harmful. If that ever did happen than I'd be on your side and I think you'd find so would many people in the industry that you clearly have such a low opinion of.

I do understand that there is every reason to believe that RF radiation will have some effect, the point where our views diverge is whether there is any reason to think the effect would be harmful. I confess that I don't read all the links you include, but while in those that I do there seems to be plenty of theorising about ways in which radio exposure could be harmful, there just doesn't seem to be any hard evidence that actually it is. It is so widespread that surely if there were a harmful effect then it would be obvious. I guess you feel it is obvious, but it's not to me and it's not to society as a whole. I think you and Agnes must just know very different people to me.

I am not inclined to trust the slant TetraWatch may put on anything they say they have been told, but, although I wouldn't choose the word 'pulsing', I know what you and they mean by it and I do agree that in this context TETRA is a pulsed system. I can assure you that Airwave is not engaged in a secret experiment on the effects of TETRA, but I think I can offer a possible explanation for the changes TetraWatch claim to have observed.

They say that TETRA is unique in that it is on at full power all the time. This part is not quite correct and I think they misunderstand the different types of radio carrier used. In fact it is only one of the frequencies on a cell that is on all the time, and that isn't unique because GSM works in exactly the same way. The picture of the 'pulsing' pattern in the text showing very short duration dips within the frame is correct. However, the technical standards offer two options for the way in which the base station deals with the guard times between timeslots, which is what these dips are. Firstly, the base station may ramp the power amplifier down as is shown in their example picture. However, there is also an option to continue transmitting during this time a defined pattern of bits known as a training sequence (the same pattern is already present in the centre of each timeslot). It is possible that different base station equipment options are set up in different ways. I must emphasise that this is just a guess; I have never seen the specific configuration options for a Motorola TETRA base station.

Your anecdote was interesting. Not the story itself which is rather far-fetched, but the concept. We all experience this effect in change in perception level with sound. For example in a very noisy environment you may be happy to have someone shout in your ear, but in a quiet place the same shout so close to your ear would seem deafeningly loud, even painful. Our threshold of hearing changes with background noise. This characteristic can be plotted to build a psychoacoustic model. This is the principle of operation used for MP3 audio compression. Knowledge of how loud noises will block out quiet ones enables information relating to the parts of a music track that we can't really hear to be removed. It's surprising in fact how much we can't hear, hence the very high compression ratios that can be achieved. Our brilliant brains fill in the rest. A similar thing can happen with radio systems, an effect known as receiver quietening.

I confess that I hadn't heard of the EMX product before. An interesting concept. In essence then they say that regular 'pulsing' is bad but pseudo-random 'pulsing' is not a problem. Mask the mobile's regular patters with random noise and all is well. I'm sceptical of course, but it's not completely mad. Have you tried it? How is the chip powered though and, if it is powered, how do they avoid interference problems?

frosty42
# Posted: 26 Jul 2008 07:45
Reply 


Agnes!!! you gullible idiot!!!!!

Bryan
# Posted: 28 Jul 2008 12:45
Reply 


To all,

I would just like to distance myself publically from the attitude shown by Frosty42.

Frosty,

If you have comments to make then do so, but just throwing insults doesn't help anybody. If you take the time you will find that there are contributors on this site, Henrik in particular, who are very well informed, intelligent and with whom you can have a very constructive dialog.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 28 Jul 2008 19:16
Reply 


Bryan,

I wouldn't take people like Frosty too seriously. I was going to erase his lame comments that have been sprinkled all over - but since you've replied to him and I've vowed never to censor your input ...I'll have to let this one stay ;-)

Anne
# Posted: 1 Aug 2008 13:24
Reply 


Well I have missed all these arguments!
Bryan, I am getting worried about you that you are getting like the rest of us. You are being affected by these microwves you love so much. Watch out - you are getting bad tempered.
Lay off your mobile phone and other related technologies - turn them off and see if you become less 'short fused'. Then go back and use them and see if you get bad tempered.
Sorry bad I don't see how you can get so hot under the collar about people that have successfully prevented the installation of a mobile phone mast. And using emergency services as a reason for the widespread use of these technologies is not a good enough reason. Emergency services have been there all those years and managed quite well. There is no need to have a mast in every street or the population hold a mobile phone.
It's all a matter of 'concentration'; we can all cope with some exposure and we have evolved to withstand the background radiation.
Believe me I would give anything to get rid the ill-effects of microwave radiation.

Bryan
# Posted: 4 Aug 2008 12:07
Reply 


No need to worry Anne, I remain Mr. Laid-back, but thanks for the concern.

The mast in question was not a mobile phone mast; it was a potential TETRA mast. I accept that if a community as whole wished to block a mobile phone mast then they should be entitled to do so. I can't understand why they would wish to, but it's a free(ish) world. So long as we ensure that the silent majority have not been bullied by the vocal minority then they should be free to choose. Operators are very aware that 'the public' are their customers. By and large they will change their plans if they feel that rightly or wrongly their actions will create bad feeling.

However, it is only fair to admit that it has not always been this way. I would acknowledge that some operators, especially Orange in their first few years of operation, were rather cavalier in their network build. I have certainly heard of instances where Orange used what can only be described as bully-boy tactics with local authorities when building new sites. But this really is the past. Local concerns are now taken very seriously and great efforts are made to avoid conflict in the first instance. As an example you may recall an incident, last year I think, when O2 removed a large mast near a school. In return they were granted permission to build three much smaller and less obtrusive masts around the area. This alleviated local anxiety about the mast and at the same time provided a much better engineering solution for coverage in the area. Win-win I think and only achieved through open consultation.

TETRA is a different matter. I think that I explained why the emergency services have not in fact been managing fine all these years so I'm not going to cover that ground again, not in this thread at least. What shocked me was the jubilant attitude expressed about having done something that will, sure as the sun rises in the morning, cost somebody their life. The irony being that those doing this believe that they are acting in the interests of their local community when quite the opposite is true.

Anne
# Posted: 6 Aug 2008 13:34
Reply 


Bryan, I must say you always write in such a sensible way and I do actually take notice of what you say, however those of us who get ill know that the whole microwave issue is so serious.
You talk about emergency services and its going to 'cost somebody their life'. It may well but these technologies are costing many people their quality of life.
You mention bullying by the minority etc. I will tell you who is being bullied. Anyone dare mention that mobile phones make them ill and wait for the response. I only mentioned this a few times at work and the sarcasm I got for months after was quite upsetting. At home it is equally bad so the m word is just not used (as long as they keep them turned off in the house).

I know you find it difficult to believe that people get ill from radiation and if you don't get affected yourself I can understand why. I will give you an analogy: Some people are allergic to peanuts and can get very ill. In fact if you notice just about every food has warning (or otherwise) that nuts are present in that food.
I can eat peanuts and I like peanut butter so I find it difficult to believe that anyone can get ill. However I accept it, but then I have dust allergy and cannot tolerate very dusty atmospheres e.g. when gardening.

It seems to me that people vary in many ways. You know that high 'concentrations' of microwaves can make people ill, e.g. being near radar. Others, it appears, can get ill when the source is further away - at less concentrations. It also appears - true to the body's immune system - once a person gets a high dose, next time they react when exposed to a lower dose. Again I can understand this as far as chemicals and 'allergens' are concerned but find it difficult to accept 'radiation' doing the same thing. However, who would have believed years ago that sunlight can cause an immune reponse. Now we accept that staying in the sun for too long can burn skin and even cause skin cancer. It is a huge problem in Austalia, where very fair people live in a very sunny climate.
We have evolved to cope with the natural radiation, but these microwave technologies immerse us in more radiation than we are meant to have and some people are just not coping, just like the Australians who were meant to live in Northen Europian countries with much less sunlight.
N.B. I used the word 'concentration' in want of a better word but I think you know what I mean.
Regards
Anne

Bryan
# Posted: 8 Aug 2008 12:26
Reply 


Anne,

I am sorry to hear how you have been treated when you express your views about mobile phone radiation and your health. I have never met anybody who has felt the way you and other contributors on this site do so I can't say that I would never behave in the same way, though I hope I would not. I have never doubted that you or anyone else has experienced real illness; I just don't see the link to radio systems.

I don't think that allergies like nut or pollen reactions can be used as a parallel example. The reason is that the mechanisms involved in these allergies are very well understood, and indeed this understanding enables drugs to be used to treat these conditions. Indeed I have shown a severe reaction to bee stings, but have no reaction to other insects, including wasps. The reaction could have been fatal but the administration of antihistamine switched it off like a light. It is possible that you might not be correct that the reactions you describe could reflect some kind of exceptional sensitivity exhibited by a minority of the population. But if it is then the mechanism it must be something different to the well known allergy mechanisms. If that were not the case then you should be able to treat your problems with the same drugs that sorted my bee-sting reaction. I think we are almost in agreement here aren't we? I should make it clear that I don't think this is the case, I'm simply saying that at the moment we have no proof that it is not. It is clear though that whatever the cause of your problems they do not affect the vast majority of the population.

I understand the tendency to link the sunlight exposure to RF exposure. Both light and radio are just at different frequencies in the EM spectrum after all. However, it would be wrong to assume that they exhibit the same physical properties. The enormous difference in frequency makes a big difference in the way they interact with their environment. As regards exposure to UV radiation in sunlight, sunburn and cancer are not allergic reactions and both can affect the whole population (irrespective of skin colour). The more noticeable problem in Australia is not because of the influx of Northern Europeans it is because of the growing hole in the ozone layer, which currently sits over Australia. The result is that UV is not filtered out by the atmosphere. There are plenty of Northern Europeans living in other very hot parts of the world with no problem. I have personal experience of living and working outdoors in a desert environment. I worked for six months in more than 40 degrees heat with no sun protection. Within two weeks my skin had build up resilience and I was able to work without a problem, (the first two weeks were awful though :-)). Conversely the darkest skinned individual could get nasty sunburn from an hour on Bournemouth beach.

Anne
# Posted: 20 Aug 2008 16:46
Reply 


Bryan, thank you for your response and I tend to largely agree with you but I did not make myself clear, so there is a degree of misunderstanding.
1. The peanut allergy was supposed to make the point that even though I don't get ill by eating peanuts I can understand that some people do, so perhaps you can do the same with microwaves.
2. Sunlight causing burns and even cancer was to make the point that it is so natural to be in the sun - we have evolved that way. However, if we over do it we can get ill by it. Hence microwaves can be quite harmless as background radiation but if we are exposed to too much as we are now with mobile phones (and others) they too can become harmful.
As a matter of fact I don't think that microwaves cause illness by the allergy route, I think it is a much more direct mechanism such as altering the electrical impulses in the nervous system. As some researchers have noted it could be calcium ions leaching out into the brain tissue. Calcium ions are involved in the transmission of nerve impulses.
I also think it is dose-related. Most people can cope with some exposure but a mobile phone, Wifi and microwave mast in the vicinity may be just too much for some.
One other point I wish to make is about the scientific method, i.e. the progression from observation, hypothesis, theory and fact because it is one reason that is used to defend microwave technologies - that there is no evidence that they are harmful.
The first premise, observation, is dismissed so how can researchers go on to postulate and test a hypothesis? (never mind all the other constraints put upon them - i.e being funded by mobile phone companies).
So there are people like me who cry out 'listen to us we are made ill by these technologies' but we are told it is all in the mind.
And of course many people are not able to say coherently how they feel so they are treated as lazy, depressed, psychotic or however the symptoms appear in them - indeed they may not even know why they feel so bad.
Believe me if I was not careful I would also be a statistic in the drop out population.
P.S. The 'hole in the ozone layer' is evidence that when humans get exposed to more than they should they get ill.
By the way, allergies are generally caused by proteins that get into the body and it makes antibodies against them. However, non-proteins e.g. chemicals can cause allergies by altering the proteins and they appear diferent and so antibodies can be made against these.
New scientist is great for general science!

Anne
# Posted: 8 Sep 2008 16:41
Reply 


So Bryan,
No take?
I only get on this website once a week or thereabouts, so I take it you are not gooing to reply?!

Bryan
# Posted: 10 Sep 2008 12:23
Reply 


Sorry Anne,

It wasn't that I was ignoring you. I did read your post and had intended to reply, but got caught up in other things.

Actually I can't see much here that I don't agree with.

Point 1. Yes I take the point about the peanut allergy, but the difference for me is that for the peanuts there is a known mechanism and for low-level microwave exposure there is not a known mechanism.

Point 2. Yes again I think I agree with what you are saying here, but perhaps I draw out of it a different conclusion. We know sunlight is safe until we suffer over exposure. Similarly, we know over-exposure to microwave radiation can be dangerous too, in fact with similar effects to sunlight over exposure. I think we differ on what appears to be a safe limit, and that in turn depends of what the mechanism for harm might be.

As we all know Legal limits are based on heating effects and, from that perspective in isolation, surly we all agree that they work. By that I mean that you are not suggesting that anyone is really getting cooked. The question is whether there is anything else going on in addition to heating, is it not?

It does appear that there are observable effects as a result of exposure, of which I think the Calcium leaching is probably the best example. Three questions still remain though. Does it happen in the real world? If it does happen in the real world, does it represent a health risk? If it does happen in the real world and it does represent a health risk, why doesn't it affect everyone?

I absolutely take your very excellent point about the progression from observation to hypothesis. In a way it is at the core of why I don't agree with many of the views expressed here. As I've said many times I am not qualified to talk about the medical or biological effects, therefore my opinion is formed largely through observation. I have never met anyone who has suffered problems from RF exposure (bear in mind I work with people who are routinely exposed far more the general population), I don't know anyone who has met anyone who has suffered and I don't know anyone who knows anyone who has suffered. Now bearing in mind a recent article in that most excellent of magazines 'The New Scientist', which claimed that an individual might have a connection to the entire population of the world through only six such relationships then I can only assume that if there is an effect it must be very small indeed. Hence the problem of observation. Perhaps some might argue that many of these people might in fact be sufferers and just don't know it. Perhaps that applies to me too, after all I have suffered from time to time most of the symptoms people describe; I just don't attribute it to my mobile phone. I blame it on my boss.

I would say though that despite the lack of observation evidence the scientific world has nevertheless progressed to the next stage of researching for a possible link. I accept of course that there may be some disagreement here about the neutrality of that research.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 11 Sep 2008 17:17
Reply 


Bryan,

Quick comment here. I'm just back from the Radiation Research conference at the Royal Society in London where leading scientists in the field detailed several mechanisms of harm from low-level microwaves. Claiming that no such mechanisms exist is wrong.

As you mention yourself there is the well-established calcium-efflux effect where low-level microwaves selectively remove calcium ions from cell membranes, both on the outside membrane and membranes of inside compartments of cells. This makes cell membranes less stable and allow unwanted elements to enter the cell and disturb it's metabolism. This also allows the release of digestive enzymes and free-radicals to leak from internal cell-compartments and wreak havoc onto DNA. There is no "energy reserve" in the body so if the cells of the body are working overtime to balance metabolism and repair damage then people experience fatigue.
I did an interview with Prof. Andrew Goldsworthy where he kindly explained this mechanism and I'll post it in the resources section asap.
You ask "Does it happen in the real world?". The symptoms are fatigue, cognitive problems, sleep problems and osteoporosis to name a few - all effects that are increasing in the population, and fast.

There is a mechanism called the "Fenton reaction", described by Prof. Henry Lai, that causes a over-production of free-radicals inside cells as a reaction to low-level microwave radiation. This leads to DNA damage and cell death.

There is the vibrational-receptor mechanism there proteins on the cell membranes pick up information-carrying-radiowaves (another term for modulated RF). This leads to ion-channels on the cell-membrane closing down which in turn traps waste products (like free radicals) inside cells and impairs inter-cellular communication (leading to organ stress).
Dr. George Carlo explained that, interestingly, people require higher doses of medication for an effect when they are exposed to EMF. Remove them from exposure and the dosage requirement goes back to normal. This clinical observation is consistent with the explanation of ion-channels closing down on cell-membranes. So yes, these things are happening in the real world.

Best regards,
Henrik

Anne
# Posted: 14 Sep 2008 12:27
Reply 


Bryan,
I think you have answered the whole question yourself - that people don't know they are affected. Let's face it it is easy to blame the boss, but are you telling me that people don't take time off work due to illness, they don't complain of headaches, or get bad tempered especially for no good reason?
OK these have been with us since humans have been on the earth, but even you would agree, people are just so negative and everything is wrong and they don't need much of a reason to get depressed. We have had the best years of life ever on the earth (plenty of food, comfort, health etc.) yet people are so dissatisfied.
My mother made the comment recently 'What's the matter with everybody. Why are they so miserable, they have everything they need yet they complain and they are unhappy'.
Even headlines in the papers are acknowledging that we have a miserable population (and that was before the credit crunch - goodness knows what will happen now that they do have something to get realy upset about - increase in suicides!?)
And don't say people are working hard now and are stressed, because my mother worked hard and long hours for many years, but I don't want to give away any more on this.
So back to the problem of microwaves and health. You see if people don't make the connection then how is research going to be done assuming that there is money available. And most of the money is given by the mobile phone companies who have an agenda.
I made the comparison before but I shall continue to do so:
The same thing is happening with research in allergies. Even though there is no question that avoiding the most common alllergens can reduce symptoms you can still find research papers which conclude that redution in symptoms is not significant just keep taking the medicines.
One of the most influential allergies charity is funded by pharmaceutical companies.
We would asssume that because such research is carried out at universities it is somehow above board - not so - getting grants is an important part of their assessment.
So we have a long way to go before any hard and fast research shows cause and affect. In any case when it does someone else comes along and says the opposite. In the meantime we should listen to 'anectodal' evidence and people experiences. So unscientific! The price is too dear to ignore.

Mudfoot
Member
# Posted: 19 Feb 2009 22:27
Reply 


Dear All,

I've come across your posts and read with much interest. Thank you all for your open discussions.

My interest lies in long term effects of electromagnetic /RF radiation I'm 52 was born over a radio & TV shop with all the associated radiation, lived with it 24/7 for the first 26 years of my life and continue to work as an electronics engineer working with electronics and some RF.

I'm also a licenced radio ammateur although for personal reasons I've hardly been active in the last 25 years. My father also worked and lived likewise, dieing suddenly at the age of 58 from cancer of the lymph gland.

We had a lot of customers, doctors, consultants who were gunning for him in his last 6 weeks, mercifully it was a short illness, but their questioins made me realise that his and my chosen profession had a hidden threat.

My rekindled interest lies in the recent errection of a 3G mast not 50 yds from the back of my house, despite objections from myself and a number of residents.

Like some of your posts I believe that we should be left to live our lives as individuals as we see fit, it is not for us to dictate what others have to accept or vice versa. In this respect I do believe that successive governments, and corporations will in years to come have to bare the brunt of critism for the health problems we are slowly accumulating.

I shall be using my experience in the calibration and certification industry to ensure that the local mast is not just designed to be compliant but IS compliant as all too often bodies who should know better rely on unsupported arguments by sighting standards or legislation in the mis guided belief that compliance is a certificate of conformity (in its self a valueless document in a court of law) or and appropraite statement rather than the measured parameters supported by an uncertainty of measurement on the actual working installation eg a certified measurement with traceability to national/ international standards, usually traceable to UKAS because the bodies and proceedure are independently audited.

In many cases companies self certify by way of design files including CE/EMC/MPT type approvals testing of individual sub assemblies however this does not necessarily give the same result as testing the finnished installation for compliance to a standard.

For interested parties who may have a more astute grasp of the law than me and a purse deep enough to fight the established operators and misguided planning authorities in the courts I may be able to assist them by assesing technical information relating to electrical and RF compliance and certification for flaws and errors thereby providing another potential tool to assist them in their cause.

Sincerely David / Winchester

Anonymous
# Posted: 24 Feb 2009 18:54
Reply 


No astute grasp here, but I have been reading thru the governing body guidelines. ( I hear the electromagnetic waves) Just last week I was reading the special precautions advised, it's as you say they have warned that the equipment should be tested. To my surprise they even acknowledge The Microwave Auditory Effect. How at least it is stressful and potential harmful. They summized it with ratio small percentage of population.

Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Underlined Style  Image Link  URL Link 

» Username  » Password 
You can post anonymously by entering a nickname with no password (if that nickname has not been taken by another member) or by leaving both fields empty. If you have an account you can also log in from this page without posting a message.
 

These forums are running on easy forum software miniBB™ © 2001-2021