Atawhai

By MATT BOWEN - Eastern Courier

The Hegley family fought the law and the law won.

Manukau City Council has granted telecommunications company 2degrees permission to install and operate two controversial cellphone transmission sites.

The family of seven will soon have cabinets and an antenna outside their Clovelly Rd home.

Mayor Len Brown says the time had come to make a decision despite the strong concerns expressed by residents.

"We've thoroughly canvassed this issue, heard expert opinion from all sides and looked at alternative locations that have the least possible impact on people in their homes."

A council working party tasked with finding alternative sites failed.

Government standards allow the equipment to be put in road reserves almost as of right, Mr Brown says.

"The council has to follow the government legislation on this.

"We're not in a position to just ban cell sites from Manukau.

We are required to act reasonably and treat all applicants fairly under the responsibilities and obligations of the law," he says.

Mrs Hegley says her family is in turmoil over the implications of last Thursday's decision.

It was "heartless" and will be "damaging for the community" because it gives the green light for remaining and future cell site applications, she says.

"They all knew that would happen because I have sent many emails advising how this will affect us if it goes ahead."

Plans to extend their home to provide two extra bedrooms for their children will be scrapped because of health concerns from the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the mast.

Mrs Hegley says design and council fees for the extension cost $8000.

She says they'll be forced to move to another suburb because they can't afford to buy a six-bedroom home in the Bucklands Beach area.

Their children will have to change schools, she says.

"All our hard work over the past four years renovating our home, because it was in bad condition, has gone to waste.

"A considerable amount of equity in our home will also be lost due to the tower or worse still we will not be able to sell it at all."

The other site licence granted was outside 25 Pigeon Mountain Rd ?

Dear Ministers and NRL staff 

Please find attached a published article by Samuel Milham of the Washington State Department of Health linking electrification of the USA with increased cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and suicide.

Milham concludes:

 "If this hypothesis and findings outlined here are even partially true, the explosive recent increase in radiofrequency radiation, and high frequency voltage transients sources, especially in urban areas from cell phones and towers, terrestrial antennas, wi-fi and wi-max systems, broadband internet over power lines, and personal electronic equipment, suggests that like the 20th century EMF epidemic, we may already have a 21st century epidemic of morbidity and mortality underway caused by electromagnetic fields. The good news is that many of these diseases may be preventable by environmental manipulation, if society chooses to."

 Milham's hypothesis, analysis and conclusion is frightening bearing in mind the recent proliferation of deliberate EMR emissions in New Zealand ? in and directly outside many of our homes, schools and wider communities - based on the present assumption that EMR should be assumed to be safe unless the contrary can be proven with 100% scientific confidence.

 It also means that the baseline that has been used for studying the effect of exposure to cell-phones, cell towers, wi-fi etc was not really a "baseline" at all, due to the effect of existing background exposure.  

 The impact of this is like basing smoking studies on the differences between the health of active smokers compared to the health of passive smokers. In fact with smokers the real test is heath effects on active smokers against those who have not been exposed to cigarette smoke at all. Likewise the proper test for assessing harm caused by EMR is the effect of those exposure to EMR cf those who have not been exposed at all. 

Studies and their results are so much compelling when they are properly designed and "controlled". 

At the very least, Milham's paper provides another reason why New Zealand's approach to EMR management needs urgent review to bring it in line with best international practice and why unnecessary exposure of our citizens to EMR must be avoided.

 The risks of EMR have never been properly studied and are not fully understood.  There is no good reason to exempt EMR from the usual criteria of the RMA (including the wide definition of "effects" including possible effects of high potential impact and cumulative effects.

 The NES for Telecommunications is VERY BAD LAW. It adopts a standard (NZS2772:1 1999) that was intended for a different purpose and which applies the wrong threshold test for "effects" (a scientific proof standard (ie 100% confidence) rather than much more precautionary RMA standard). It forces unwanted exposure on communities against their will and without any opportunity for consultation. The NES is contrary to the RMA. The process for adopting it was unlawful (the former Minister asked and answered the wrong questions in the supporting s32 and s44 report- assessing the application against the government's desired policy outcome rather than the RMA's requirement of how it achieved the sustainable management purpose of the RMA).

Responsible governments around the world have reviewed their stance on EMR to significantly reduce maximum environmental exposure limits to EMR and to minimise unnecessary exposure. Many governments and experts are warning parents and schools to take active steps to limit the exposure of children to cellphones and wi-fi.

 Meanwhile our New Zealand government is forcing its citizens to be assaulted with wanted and harmful EMR ? contrary to the NZ Bill of Rights Act and our international rights ? at home, at school and at work.

 This issue impacts on the current and future physical and mental health and wellbeing of our communities and the wider environment. It is important that the Prime Minister, Ministers of Health, Environment, Education, Justice, Agriculture, Corrections, Accident Compensation, Labour and others are aware of the latest research about the effects of EMR (Electromagnetic radiation) as it affects not only your portfolios, but also everyone in New Zealand.

 Please advise:

1. When will the NZ government open its mind and realise that the advice it has been relying on to date is outdated and/or influenced by vested interests.
   
2. What forum is there for the government to listen to the warnings of international experts and to what its own citizens want for future EMR management in New Zealand  
   
3. When will this happen? and
   
4. Who will accept responsibility for ensuring a proper analysis is undertaken?
   

I look forward to your considered response.

Thanks

Sue Grey LLB(Hons), BSc, RSHDipPHI

Monday, 28 September 2009

By MARIANNE KELLY (The times.co.nz)

FOUR years of house renovations and $10,000 worth of building extension planning have come to nothing for a devastated couple who say they're forced to move now that a cellphone mast is to go in front of their house.
Manukau City Council's approval of a 2degrees site outside 145 Clovelly Road, Bucklands Beach has left Rowan and Tina Hegley "extremely upset".
"We're devastated that we can't go ahead with our building extension," says Mr Hegley. "Our children's bedroom would end up 12m from the antenna.
"It's a disgrace," he says. "The vote should have been done on moral grounds, but [Manukau Mayor] Len Brown ignored his public.

"They [the city councillors] have destroyed our lives. We've got five children we're trying to accommodate. We're gutted. How can humans do that? They don't care."

While health issues around cellphone masts are in a grey area, Mrs Hegley says many studies have shown implications.

"We can't extend because I will never take that risk with our children. So the council's decision forces us to move.

"We have five children who all walk to school. Now the dynamics of the family will change. We can't afford a six-bedroom house on the peninsula."

Photo ROWAN HEGLEY.

Monday, 28 September 2009

By MARIANNE KELLY (the Times.co.nz)

• Howick and Pakuranga Times
  

TO cries of "shame", "traitor" and "disgrace to the human race", Manukau City councillors weathered a barrage of acrimony from cellphone mast opponents.

They were incensed that two sites in residential areas were given the go-ahead on Thursday night.

Applications from telco 2degrees for licences outside 145 Clovelly Road and 25 Pigeon Mountain Road have been twice deferred because councillors were waiting for guidelines for siting telco infrastructure in Manukau. The aim was to work collaboratively with telecommunications network operators.

A key part of the document, which materialised at Thursday's full council meeting, said that where technically possible, antennae, masts and cabinets should be situated away from existing residential dwellings, education facilities and rest homes.

Manurewa councillor Colleen Brown supported Pakuranga councillor David Collings' attempt to again defer the decision on the Bucklands Beach sites.

"I want to see the guidelines tested," said Mrs Brown. "They're not over-riding any statutory legislation. I want us to sit around the table with the telcos."

The two sites did not stack up in the guidelines, Mr Collings said.

"Surely we need a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with 2degrees, or are we adopting these sites tonight? We're still putting the cart before the horse. Our hand is being forced here by one of the telcos, yet the real work is to sit down and negotiate an MOU."

The council also received an officer's report that concluded evidence of any negative impact on property values from telecommunications equipment tended to be limited and inconclusive.

Debate on the Clovelly Road site started with fiery interjections from the public gallery, such as "this site will be 12m from a child's bedroom. Is this Russia?" It led Mayor Len Brown to teeter on the edge of having people removed from the chamber.

"We have been dealing with this for six months now," Mr Brown said. "We have a statutory obligation. Parliament has made it clear we have to make the decision about where the masts go on our berms.

"I have spoken to the Prime Minister who will recommend the Cabinet looks at changes to the National Environmental Standards (NES), particularly the need for consultation. Everyone acknowledges this is not perfect.

"We have received legal advice on both sides of this debate. But we can't unreasonably withhold our approval. These sites will not meet with the satisfaction of a number of people, but ultimately as leader of this city I must see that we make our decision. I don't arrive at that with any degree of happiness. I will support these sites for want of better alternatives from the viewpoint of the applicant and our roles and responsibilities under statute," said Mr Brown.

Botany-Clevedon councillor Maggie Burrill said: "I have never known 10 pages of legislation to cause so much trouble in a community. If the emotion and work had been put to the Government we might have achieved things. We have no power except to uphold the law and administer the regulations. This is an evil piece of legislation."

Two resolutions, to add a site outside 145 Clovelly Road and 25 Pigeon Mountain Road to the network site licence were passed on an 11-6 vote of councillors. As the public gallery emptied, cries of venom rained down on the sober-faced elected members.

 Columbia University, New York: March 12, 2009/

International Scientists Find Harmful Effects from Wireless Technologies and Urge New Safety Rules for Cell Phones

Public health concerns and scientific evidence for risks from cell phones and other wireless devices was published on March 12 2009 in the journal Pathophysiology. International researchers have urged quick precautionary action to address a possible epidemic of brain tumors and many other health risks. Over four billion people around the world now use cell phones. They are rapidly eliminating the use of traditional land-line phones throughout the world. Health researchers from six countries give findings in fifteen (15) chapters covering health risks to humans and wildlife from electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation. A summary of findings and quotes from authors is available at http://www.bioinitiative.org/press_release/index.htm

Research professor and Editor Martin Blank PhD (Associate Professor, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons) says, This special issue of Pathophysiology is about the human body's sensitivity to EMF signals in the environment, e.g., EMF effects on DNA, effects on the brain from cell phone radiation, and how EMFs in the environment may lead to Alzheimers disease, dementia and breast cancer. The scientific evidence tells us that our safety standards are inadequate, and that we must protect ourselves from exposure to EMF due to power lines, cell phones and the like.

Wildlife biologist Alfonso Balmori, PhD of Valladolid, Spain reports that, electromagnetic radiation is a form of environmental pollution which may hurt wildlife. Phone masts located in their living areas are irradiating continuously some species that could suffer long-term effects, like reduction of their natural defenses, deterioration of their health, problems in reproduction and reduction of their useful territory through habitat deterioration. Therefore microwave and radiofrequency pollution constitutes a potential cause for the decline of animal populations and deterioration of health of plants living near phone masts.

Contact: Martin Blank PhD
Tel: (212) 305-3644
Email: mb32@columbia.edu

Articles On-Line:

Sciencedirect

Radiation Research Trust's Eileen O'Connor Announces New Report on Cellphones and Brain Tumours

You Tube Intro to Cellphone Report

25th August, 2009, Coldfield, West Midlands, UK. Radiation Research Trust, a UK-based charity focused on the health effects of electromagnetic fields from wireless technologies, today released a report, "Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone," along with other international health advocacy groups on two continents.

The new report analyzes the science on cellphones and brain tumours, and reviews in detail 11 key design flaws in the 13-country, industry funded Interphone Study, which underestimates risk of brain tumours.

Eileen O'Connor, Director of Radiation Research Trust, says, "It is time for government and industry to stop the denial about the health effects of microwave radiation and do what is right to protect public health". Andrew Mitchell MP, Trustee of Radiation Research Trust and Shadow Secretary of State for International Development, says, "I welcome the scientific debate about cell phones and brain tumours and a serious discussion of any design flaws of the Interphone study."

Pressure has been mounting on governments around the world to protect children from cell phone radiation. Russian officials have recommended children under the age of 18 years not use cell phones at all. Similarly, the United Kingdom, Israel, Belgium, Germany and India have discouraged use of cell phones by children. In Finland, the Radiation and Nuclear Power Authority has urged parents to err on the side of caution. France is nearing the point where it will make it illegal to market cell phones to children, and recently banned mobile phones in elementary schools.

Radiation emitted from wireless technologies has been shown in scientific research to show leakage of the blood-brain-barrier, and deleterious effects on sperm, including decreased sperm counts and reduced sperm motility, among many other biological effects. Studies independent of industry, consistently show there is a "significant" risk of brain tumours from mobile phone use.

Recently, in Austria, The Austrian Social Insurance for Occupational Risk (AUVA) commissioned Vienna Medical University to research the effects of cell phone radiation on the brain, immune system, and proteins. The AUVA studies have further confirmed the existence of non-thermal effects from cellphone radiation, reinforcing the need for governments to adjust exposure guidelines.

Brian Stein, Chairman of Radiation Research Trust, and CEO of food giant, Samworth Brothers, adds "Responsible action on the part of governments is urgently required to protect future generations."

The UK Radiation Research Trust (RRT) is a leading health advocacy organization mobilizing supporters and advocating for a precautionary approach to electromagnetic radiation and government warnings regarding wireless technologies. Its purpose is to uncover and communicate the true facts concerning electromagnetic radiation and health. Other groups behind the report Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern include Powerwatch (UK), and The EMR Policy Institute, ElectromagneticHealth.org and The Peoples Initiative Foundation in the U.S.

The Nelson Mail

OPINION: Telecom's ongoing willingness to explore alternative sites for a cellphone tower in Atawhai is welcome, but cannot be taken for granted indefinitely.

Big business is often regarded as arrogant a charge that has been levelled at Telecom more than once. It has previously appeared exasperated at the reception given proposals to build towers in the Nelson region for its new mobile phone network.

Opposition crystallised around plans for a tower at a site in Atawhai owned by the company and already zoned for telecommunications equipment in the city council plan, but with a playcentre and preschool nearby.

This prompted Telecom spokesman Ian Bonnar to note that no community had been as "vociferous" as Nelson in its opposition to the towers, and led to his company putting its plans for the region on hold while it sought alternative sites in the area.

Now, it has emerged that the company is considering a spot on the council-owned Titoki Reserve to build the tower.

There are still some questions around this site, and further protest is possible when the idea is considered at a city council meeting on Thursday.

However, cellphone tower opponents might consider swallowing a small dose of pragmatism, just as Telecom is attempting to accommodate their concerns.

The technology is controversial, and some protesters would only be satisfied if no more towers were built and the existing ones torn down.

While it is acknowledged that the precautionary principle must apply to community health, the evidence against the towers is not sufficiently robust and the use of the technology so widespread that no one can seriously expect this will happen any time soon.

On the face of it, the suggested alternative site looks as if it should be more acceptable to the Atawhai community than the Telecom-owned one.

It might be better to consider it the lesser of two evils, as the company has the option to build, as of right, on its Atawhai Crescent site and could easily choose to do so if alternative solutions are shot down.

Gains tax worth a look For decades, MPs brave enough to suggest a capital gains tax on property have been regarded as having a death wish.

There should be no surprise that Prime Minister John Key is far from convinced of the idea's merit, as National supporters will be among those who benefit most from the status quo.

Pipfruit New Zealand chairman Ian Palmer, in pointing out the devastating impact a high New Zealand dollar is having on exporters, is the latest to moot the tax to encourage exchange rate stability.

RADIO NZ:Updated at 5:01pm on 13 September 2009

Some parents in Nelson are claiming victory in a two year fight to stop Telecom building a mobile phone tower within metres of a playcentre.

Telecom believes it has found an alternative site, and the Nelson City Council will consider the move at a meeting next week.

The Atawhai Playcentre and Brightsparks pre-school have campaigned against the tower, saying there are unknown health impacts from radio frequency radiation.

A spokesperson, Sue Grey, says it's great news for Nelson that Telecom may build elsewhere.

But she says numerous other schools around the country are facing the same problem, and a nationwide petition on the issue is awaiting parliamentary consideration

The Nelson Mail

Telecom is considering the western edge of Titoki Reserve in Dodson Valley, Atawhai, among several alternative sites for a proposed cellphone tower in the area.

The company's earlier plans to build a tower on its current telephone exchange site at Atawhai Crescent have drawn strong opposition from the neighbouring Atawhai Playcentre, Brightsparks preschool and local residents.

The city council was to receive a report at its full council meeting this week recommending it approve a possible site on the council-owned reserve for a cellphone tower, after further consultation with the community and Telecom.

The council will also consider as part of the recommendation that any decision to look at use of the site be delayed until the potential effects on the reserve were investigated and likely annual rental to the council was known.

Council manager of parks and facilities Paul McArthur said the council was considering options to help the community and Telecom find a more palatable solution to that proposed at Atawhai Cres.

He understood the company had other sites in mind as well, which were not on council land. Telecom had also considered Corder Park in Atawhai Cres as a possible site, but council staff had recommended this option not be pursued.

Mr McArthur said the council would be acting as an advocate for the community to find the best solution. Telecom had a legal right to install and operate a cellphone tower at its exchange property in Atawhai Cres, and this plan could be pursued if Telecom was unable to find an alternative, he said.

Posted by Nelson City Council on 11 September 2009

The Nelson City Council is considering options to help the community and Telecom find a more palatable solution to the proposed cell phone tower at Atawhai.

The company's plans to build a tower on its current Telephone Exchange site on Atawhai Crescent have drawn strong opposition from the neighbouring Atawhai Playcentre, Brightsparks preschool and local residents.

Council will next week receive a report recommending that Telecom's plans to launch a public consultation include the consideration of an alternative site on the western edge of the Titoki Reserve, which is owned by Council.

Manager of Parks and Facilities, Paul McArthur, says his recommendation is aimed at Council acting as an advocate for the community to find the best solution.

The report will be considered at the next Council meeting on 17 September 2009.

By MATT BOWEN - Eastern Courier

Temporary relief is little consolation for the Hegley family at 145 Clovelly Rd.

Manukau city councillors recently deferred a decision to put a 2degrees mobile cell site outside their home.

Another contentious site at 25 Pigeon Mountain Rd was also put off pending further information regarding the effects on property values.

Mrs Hegley says her husband and five children are still living with uncertainty and can't get on with their lives.

"The vote was deferred only after councillors Sharon Stewart and David Collings protested strongly for community rights," she says.

"And not to just get something done and out of the way that's proving difficult for the council to deal with due to total opposition from concerned residents."

A working party of councillors set up to investigate alternative sites before the meeting failed to find alternatives.

And mayor Len Brown's stance was "disappointing".

"At last month's meeting he was showing concern that proper process be followed for the sake of public concern. Yet at the last meeting he just wanted it to be done with no matter what."

The family is however thankful most councillors voted to defer the decision.

They also have a message for fellow residents: "These towers that are popping up all over the place are just the start.

"If sensible regulations are not sorted out soon these towers could be outside your place next as the doors open to more telecommunications companies for competition," they say.

Councillors will make a decision on the two sites at the full council meeting later this month.

The general public ... demand clear, understandable information, often so that informed individual choices can be made. There is a need to seek to ensure that advice given, and decisions made, are based on sound science, that they are independently confirmed and defensible against criticism. I have a niggling doubt, nevertheless, that when positive results of an adverse effect are eschewed, the cry goes up that they have to be independently confirmed, but perhaps too often, the same attention is not paid to the need to confirm a negative result. Also, it is not always sensible to routinely dismiss out of hand non-peer reviewed material. Such results, of course, have to be independently confirmed, and may well be right, and can sometimes give pointers to areas where further high quality research is needed. In any case, confirmed findings, whether positive, negative or equivocal, should also be made available to the non-specialist and the general public in a way that the implications are capable of clear understanding.'

Sir William Stewart, Chairman, Health Protection Agency (and previously National Radiological Protection Board), 6 September 2004

Read more ?.

EasternCourier Auckland

Residents have until September 11 to make a submission on the application to locate a cellsite at 7 Picton St.

It's one of the eight 2degrees mobile sites that have caused a community outcry lately.

The proposal involves replacing a 5.5-metre high streetlamp with a nine-metre pole of similar design.

Three panel antennas and one microwave antenna would be fixed to the pole above the lamp.

Howick Baptist Kindergarten's perimeter fence is 30 metres away.

Details at http://www.manukau.govt.nz under public notices.

Wednesday, 02 September 2009

? Howick and Botany Times

APPROVAL for two cellphone mast network licences has been put off again because information sought at Manukau City Council's July meeting failed to materialise in time for its August meeting.

Applications from telco 2degrees for licences at 145 Clovelly Road in Bucklands Beach and 25 Pigeon Mountain Road in Half Moon Bay have been deferred because councillors are still waiting for a report from officers on the effects of masts on property values and a policy including guidelines for siting telecommunications infrastructure in Manukau.

A working party was set up after the council's July meeting to consider locations for cellphone towers in Clovelly Road, Pigeon Mountain Road and Litten Road, Cockle Bay.

A recommendation to add the original Clovelly Road and Pigeon Mountain sites was opposed by Pakuranga councillor David Collings and Howick's Sharon Stewart, members of the working party.

A decision on the recommendation was then deferred at last week's meeting. After the July meeting, another working party was set up to consider guidelines.

Mr Collings, a member of both working parties, is frustrated a "chicken-and-egg situation" has resulted. Rather than establishing details and guidelines first, the working party concentrated on finding alternative sites, only to end up with the same ones.

"I raised my concerns about how we could find the sites when we should have worked out the guidelines first," he says.

The working party concluded that because 2degrees was continuing investigations into alternative sites in the Litten Road area, the council was not required to confirm its preferred location at this stage.

Mr Collings says: "It disappoints me that the working party made a recommendation on the other two sites but said 'let's not look at Litten Road' just because a large number of people in that area have angst.

"If they [members of the working party] were concerned about the issue they would not be deferring just because a number of people have come out of the woodwork.

"I hope the site is not taken off the boiler just because of the heat."

Mr Collings is also disappointed no response from the Government has been reported back to the council to its call for a review of the national environmental standards (NES). 

The council wrote to the Government, after its July meeting, with an urgent request for improvements to the level of community consultation on cell-tower sites and to consider banning sites close to homes, schools and childcare centres.

A legal challenge has also been left on the table while the council's law firm studies its implications.

Nelson environmental lawyer Sue Grey, who addressed a recent public meeting in Pakuranga, has raised issues including an apparent lack of legal authority for the council to approve telco equipment on road reserves, deficiencies in the NES regulations, failure to properly satisfy itself the regulations are fully complied with, and failure to publicly notify numerous consent applications for cell-tower and phone masts over the past six months.

Submissions to an application for resource consent for a new cellphone mast and service cabinet outside 7 Picton Street in Howick must be in by September 11. The site, applied for by 2degrees, is next to the Manukau City Council car park and 30 metres from the Howick Kindergarten in Wellington Street.

At its last meeting, Howick Community Board passed a motion the board supported the application.

Howick councillor Sharon Stewart and board member Sheanagh Noles opposed the recommendation.

The board says in its submission that the facility in close proximity to the village will give business owners and shoppers good signal coverage and that the proposed light pole replacement should be in keeping with the special character of other poles in the village.

Mr Collings is surprised the board is in support. He also questions references in the consent application to direct consultation and support from Mayor Len Brown, councillors Jami-Lee Ross and Dick Quax, along with the Howick Village Association, which has never been minuted.

Submissions to the application should be addressed to the Manager ? Resource Consents & Compliance, Manukau City Council, Private Bag 76917, Manukau City. Attention: Resource Consents & Compliance Team, Level 4, Kotuku House.

The Advocate

BY HERB DENENBERG, THE BULLETIN

MONDAY, AUGUST 31, 2009

The great cell phone cover-up may be coming to an end. A new report may finally wake the public up to the brain-cancer risks of cell phones and force necessary preventive measures.

A new report, endorsed by a prestigious group of international scientists, finds that there is a risk of brain tumors from cell phone use, that industry studies underestimate this risk, and that children have much greater risks than adults. The report, therefore, sends a message to four billion users worldwide and to the $4 billion cell phone industry that they may be facing the same kind of bad news that first burst on the scene for the tobacco industry.
This cancer threat of cell phone use has been recognized by some scientists and critics for decades, but has, essentially, been covered up by the cell phone industry and by much of the mainstream media. I asked the primary author of the new report, Lloyd Morgan, a member of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, whether he would describe what's been going on for so many years as a cover-up. Mr. Morgan told me he would describe it as a spin that amounts to a cover-up.
Cell phones emit electromagnetic radiation - more specifically, radio frequency electromagnetic radiation, which may cause damage to the DNA and may lead to cancer or other medical problems. The study focused on cell phones, but electromagnetic radiation is also produced by many other sources including cordless (or portable) phones, walkie-talkies, ham radio transmitters, and baby monitors. And, there's also the laptop computer, which, according to Mr. Slesin, should not be kept on your lap. In fact, four years ago, he wrote an article entitled "Keep That Laptop off Your Lap." He adds any radio frequency (RF) transmitter away from your body.
The report, entitled "Cell phones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern; Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone," was produced by a group called the International EMF (Electromagnetic Field) Collaborative. The endorsements of the report to date are listed in the report and will be updated on five web sites including that of the Radiation Research Trust,www.radiationresearch.org. 
The primary author of the report, Mr. Morgan, put the issue into perspective: "Exposure to cell phone radiation is the largest human health experiment ever undertaken, without informed consent, and has some 4 billion participants enrolled. Science has shown increased risk of brain tumors caused by the use of cell phones, as well as increased risk of eye cancer, salivary gland tumors, testicular cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and leukemia. The public must be informed."
Another noteworthy statement appears in the report from Chris Woolams, editor of Integrated Cancer and Oncology News: "In a world where a drug cannot be launched without proof that it is safe, where the use of herbs and natural compounds available to all since early Egyptian times are now questioned, their safety subjected to the deepest scrutiny?the idea that we can use mobile telephony, including masts, and introduce WiFi and mobile phones without restrictions around our 5 year olds is double-standards gone mad. I speak, not just as an editor and scientist that has looked in depth at all the research, but as a father that lost his beloved daughter to a brain tumor."
How does the cell phone industry respond to this report? I thought it would have a detailed rebuttal of the report on "Cell phones and Brain Tumors." Instead, the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA), which represents 275 member companies, sent me an e-mail which contained only general statements on cell phone safety from various government agencies and international organizations. I called CTIA back and left a message that I would like to discuss the specifics of the report and the rebuttal, if any. I have not heard from CTIA as of this writing.

I have been following the issue of cell phone safety for about 20 years with the help of Louis Slesin, the editor of Microwave News, which has been publishing since 1981. It now appears on the web a twww.microwavenews.org. I always found Slesin to be a reliable source and he is certainly one of the world's leading authorities on the subject. He has devoted his life to the study of cell phones and has to be considered one of the foremost heroes in the battle for product safety. He maintains his web site as a public service and relies on voluntary donations to support that work.
He convinced me that we should not discount the possibility that cell phones pose a significant risk and a high priority should be given to efforts to eliminate, control, and minimize the risk. In about 20 years of covering the story, I also got the impression that the industry was not forthcoming about the safety issues and their spokesmen and pronouncements always left me with an uneasy feeling that they were not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. To this day, I am struck by the responsibility of the critics of cell phone safety and by the irresponsibility of the cell phone industry and the regulatory agencies that are supposed to protect us, such as the FDA.
Mr. Slesin has a perfect summary of the cell phone controversy. He told me we couldn't be certain that cell phones pose a brain tumor risk, but there is enough evidence that we should take immediate action. He says no one is trying to take away anyone's cell phone, but it would be easy and virtually cost-free to take precautions. Slesin says the special problem with cell phones is that they are held against the brain. This is magnified by heavy use of cell phones, sometimes hours at a time. And, the risk is greatest for children, who are more vulnerable to damage by cell phones. Slesin recommends they not even be used by children under perhaps 15 years of age. And, this problem is being compounded by the practice of many phone users to drop landline phones, that is, wired phones and rely exclusively on cell phones.
This report being reviewed provides more evidence that the industry is simply not leveling with the public and that many of the industry-financed studies reach suspect results. As to the industry's not leveling with the public, consider the Interphone study that it is sponsoring. It was promised to be completed four years ago, but is still not done. The European Parliament found the delay was "deplorable." The design of the study is fundamentally flawed, as well-documented by "Cell Phones and Brain Tumor."  For example, users of cordless phones only were treated as unexposed. But, two independent studies found users of cordless phones had an increased risk of brain tumors. So, excluding such users underestimates the risk of brain tumors. This flaw suggests either ignorance or dishonesty on the part of the researchers running the Interphone Study. Then, there's the suspicious finding from some parts of the Interphone Study which concluded the use of a cell phone for less than ten years lowers your risk of brain tumors. This suggests the bias was so strong it eliminated enough tumor risk to show decreased incidence. The Interphone studies did find more brain tumor risk after more than ten years of cell phone use. The report notes that the risk was so great it could not be camouflaged even by the bias of the study.

The report lists eight simple steps to substantially reduce your or your children's exposure to cell phone radiation.

They include:

?    "When on a call, use a wired headset - not a wireless headset such as Bluetooth - or use in speaker-phone mode, or send text messages."

?    "Keep the cell phone away from your body - particularly pant/trouser or shirt pockets - or use a belt holster designed to shield the body from cell phone radiation, when not in use (stand-by mode)."

?    "Avoid use in a moving car, train, bus, or in rural areas at some distance from a cell tower (AKA mast or base station) as any of these uses will increase the power of the cell phone's radiation."

?    "Use the cell phone like an answering machine. Keep it off until you want to see who has called. Then, return calls, if necessary, using a wired headset or a corded land-line phone, whenever possible."

?    "Avoid use of cell phones inside of buildings, particularly with steel structures."

?    "Do not allow your children to sleep with a cell phone beneath their pillow or at the bedside."

?    "Do not allow your children under 18 to use a cell phone except in emergencies."

I checked daily newspapers the day after the report came out. I could not find one, according to a Google search, that even mentioned this report and not one that put it on the front-page - other than The Bulletin.

Herb Denenberg has served as the Loman Professor of Insurance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, and a member of the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commissioner. He was elected to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, and co-authored major legislation including the Social Protection Act of Puerto Rico and much of the insurance code of Nevada and Wisconsin.