I read the article in Fairfax Extra by Karl Polzer ["Schools Are No Place for Cell Towers," Nov. 18] and the rebuttal ["Cell Phone Antennas No Threat to Schools," Dec. 2] by John Walls, vice president of public affairs for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association.
In the rebuttal, Walls stated:
"While the wireless industry appreciates the concerns of some parents in this instance, they can be assured that no one's health, particularly their children's, would be subjected to any unnecessary risks. The possibility of negative health effects on people in close proximity to cell phone towers has been exhaustively researched by the world's leading health organizations, and all of them have reached the same conclusion: Observing prescribed standards of power emission, such facilities do not pose any threat to human health."
This statement is blatantly false. His reference is to a fact sheet on the World Health Organization Web site that was last revised in 2000 and is now out of date. Even in 2000 the health effects were not "exhaustively researched," and indeed there is much disagreement about what is considered safe. That is why radio frequency guidelines worldwide range more than six orders of magnitude! Since biological effects associated with radio frequency radiation are likely to be the same in Austria, Italy, China, Hungary, Switzerland and Russia, why do these countries have much lower guidelines than the United States?
Recent studies show that people who live within 300 meters of mobile phone base stations have a number of symptoms that are now referred to as electrical hyper- sensitivity and were originally called radio wave illness. These include fatigue, sleep disturbances, headaches, difficulty concentrating, depression, memory loss, visual and hearing disruptions, irritability, skin problems and dizziness. Symptoms are particularly severe for those within 10 meters (30 feet) of a cell phone mast.
Electrical hypersensitivity is a very real phenomenon and is classified as a disability in Sweden. The World Health Organization organized a workshop in October in Prague on electrical hypersensitivity.
Guidelines for radio frequency exposure in the United States and Canada are based on thermal effects. There is now considerable evidence that non-thermal effects exist below existing guidelines and that these may be "associated with adverse health effects," according to the Royal Society of Canada.
These studies tell me that we should be careful with the placement of mobile phone base stations. If in doubt, do not place these base stations near schools and homes and places where people spend considerable time. The adverse biological effects and eventual lawsuits are simply not worth the price of this shortsighted thinking.
Magda Havas
Associate Professor
Environmental and Resource Studies Program
Trent University
Peterborough, Ontario
With respect to negative health effects on people living in close proximity to cell phone towers, there are three different epidemiological studies, including our recent study.
