A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation

cell towers: Microwave News Article Archive (2004 - )

February 14, 2024

“A Study on Effects of Cell Phone Tower–Emitted Non-Ionizing Radiations in an Allium cepa Test System,” Environmental Monitoring Assessment, February 13, 2024. Onion roots exposed to ~1-13 µW/cm² RF from cell towers showed “enhancement of oxidative stress and genotoxicity.” The higher the exposure, the greater the effect. Levels are orders of magnitude lower than most exposure limits. From Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, India.

 

February 16, 2017

“RF Radiation Injures Trees Around Mobile Phone Base Stations,” Science for the Total Environment, December 1, 2016.

“We found a high-level damage in trees within the vicinity of phone masts.” From a German-Spanish team.

November 11, 2014
October 3, 2014

“Cell Phone Boom Spurs Antenna-Safety Worries,” Wall Street Journal, October 3, 2014.

“It’s like having a speed limit and no police,” says Marvin Wessel, an RF engineer, about the lack of FCC enforcement. See also our story from last year, “Cell Phone Carriers & the FCC: Cozy and Colluding,” which covers some of the same ground.

February 18, 2014

“Clear the Air on Mobile Tower Radiation, WHO Tells India,” The Hindu, February 19, 2014.

The advice came from Mike Repacholi, who said, “otherwise mischief mongers will create a scare about unfounded myths.”

December 2, 2013

“Safe to Install Cell Towers in City: Ex-WHO Official,” Times of India, December 3, 2013.

The banning of towers “is due to sheer ignorance, [Mike] Repacholi told mediapersons.”

August 21, 2013

“Hidden Insurance Risk Lurks in Property Leases,” Claims Journal, August 21, 2013.

“Landlords who lease space to the [commercial wireless service providers] are completely unaware of the potential for injury from RF transmitting antennas and that they will be held liable for such injures.”

April 2, 2013

The Federal Communications Commis-sion (FCC) has never levied a fine against a cell phone company for exceeding its RF exposure limits from a base station antenna.

That’s not because all of the 300,000 cell sites in the U.S. comply with the FCC rules, according to an Industry Insider with years of training and experience measuring RF radiation. He told us that he has found RF levels higher than those allowed under the FCC rules at sites across the country. The real reason there have been no fines, he said, is “because there’s collusion between the companies and the government.” The insider, an RF engineer, calls himself “EMF Expert”; he asked that his real name not be used.

"The carriers and the FCC have an extremely cozy relationship," said the engineer. "Whenever there's a problem, someone in the FCC's RF safety office warns the carrier and the company then puts the 'fire' out."

July 8, 2012

Nod to Progress Endangers An Old  Clock,” New York Times, July 7, 2012.

June 14, 2006

Most people don't notice those little boxes stuck on the sides of buildings, but if you live in a city, they're most likely to be your principal source of microwave exposure. That is, of course, when you're not using a cell phone.

June 6, 2006

A Swiss research team led by Peter Achermann of the University of Zurich has failed to replicate the Dutch TNO study (see yesterday's post). Achermann and his collaborators, Martin Röösli of the University of Bern and Niels Kuster of the IT'IS Foundation in Zurich, found no consistent effects on well-being or cognitive performance following a 45-minute exposure to 3G RF radiation, at either a 1 V/m or a 10 V/m.

The radiation signals were designed to mimic those from a mobile phone base station. The experiments were run double blind —that is, neither the subjects nor the investigators knew when the power was turned on.

April 8, 2005

Fire fighters want to know if placing cell phone towers on fire stations puts them at risk. Until a study can provide some reassurance that there is no radiation hazard, the International Association of Fire Fighters wants to ban antennas from fire stations.

February 16, 2005

It was embarrassing watching the cell phone industry shoot itself in the foot yesterday. The scene was a public hearing at the New York City Council in downtown Manhattan on a proposal to maintain and make available a list of all new cell phone antenna sites. Predictably, the mobile phone operators oppose the bill (Intro. No.149-A) and the citizen groups are backing it.

Jane Builder, a manager at T-Mobile, called the proposal “anti-business” and “anti-technology,” but there was another reason she did not even want to discuss in a public forum —the security issue. Though Builder kept mum, she had brought along Kathryn Condello who had no problem raising the specter of a terrorist attack on the city’s critical infrastructure. “Since September 11, 2001, we live in a different world,” said Condello. If the bill becomes law, she warned, it would provide “a blueprint for sabotage” with the potential of devastating the City of New York’s telecommunications. Condello was also issuing this overly dramatic —and spurious— warning on behalf of Cingular, Nextel and Sprint.

July 23, 2004

In a new report, Mobile Phone Masts, the All Party Parliamentary Mobile Group in the U.K. is recommending that every cell phone tower should be required to go through the normal planning process and that any blanket exemptions be revoked. The panel noted that this was one of the recommendations of the Stewart committee in its own report, Mobile Phones and Health, issued in the spring of 2000.

Subscribe to cell towers: Microwave News Article Archive (2004 - )