• 14 MAY 06
    • 0

    Important comments on the RMIT cell tower case

    Following a message I sent out on the bioelectromagnetics list on the RMIT building controversy, several comments were posted that are quite relevant to the case and dispute the understanding that being directly underneath a cellphone antenna facility means the RF/MW levels are minimal. As one technician said to me just yesterday: “If you have a cell phone antenna on the roof of a building, the safest place to be is below”.
    That apparently is not the case….

    Don
    ********************

    1) From Charles Claessens:

    “Christian Bornkessel did some measurements in Germany and found that beneath (also inside houses and under) mobile phone masts, there was substantial HF radiation, and in the order of the Swiss immision values.”
    Download the report at:
    http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina112d.html

    2) From Jean-Pierre Lentin:

    “This a the familiar “misconception” (or blatant lie) propagated by the cell phone operators. In my experience as a science writer specialising in bio-electromagnetics, I’ve been told many times by certified experts (sometimes working for the phone companies – but recently retired) that every time they had to measure emissions from cell phone relays on the floor below (supposedly the “safest place”), exposition was much higher than predicted by calculations. The causes are unclear – under-estimation of secondary lobe, reflections by metallic structures or other synergistic effects, but the fact is clear : the floor below is definitely not a safe place !”

    3) From Yasmin Skelt (Mast Sanity, U.K.):

    “The Big Lie – the Mobile Phone Industry promotes the “lighthouse beam” lie that the radiation goes away from the building. This was re-enforced by a stupid diagram some years ago (I think in the Stewart Report) that showed a “lighthouse beam” of radiation from a mast. However that is the intensity of the beam in that diagram is AVERAGED over 10 minutes. The Telstra diagram from years ago showing a mad zigzap pattern is correct. I have stood underneath masts and in buildings with my COM Monitor and got readings, no problem. Campaigners usually don’t have the expensive equipment to take readings, but even when we did it is ignored by the authorities. In the UK Alasdair Phillips has done readings inside buildings – he has found that sure enough the EMFs soaks through to the top floor. Here we have antennae on top of tower blocks, usually owned by councils who have low income tennants. When these tennants complain of health effects they are just ignored as the councils don’t want the hassle and also don’t want to re-house them or be taken to court.

    Sealing off floors when someone becomes ill is the common response in the UK – it is now happening in Australia. Get a spectrum analyser with a true independent EMF consultant as soon as possible – use an axe to get access to those floors. My guess is that the antennae is blasting out far further than the Operators have told the landlords.”

    Best wishes, Yasmin Skelt

    4) From Robert Reidlinger:

    “There is another aspect to consider in the matter of the RMIT cell tower case, which I have not seen mentioned. (Reflection from nearby buildings or even a reflector dish) Like sunlight, Radio signals can be reflected. Satellite TV dishes are a good example. The RF rays are collected by the dish and reflected back to a pickup cone which diverts the gathered higher density signal to the TV set.
    Milt Bowling discovered the refection theory with cellphone towers, while attending a metering program by Health Canada at school sights in Vancouver BC.

    I have also found high readings of EMF directly below cellphone towers in Canada.

    Also to be considered are the cables that run from the transformer to the antenna. If these cables are not well insulated the EMF’s can escape into the building.”

    Regards Robert

    5) From Milt Bowling:

    “Recently, I took Dr. Magda Havas to a firehall in Richmond, B.C., Canada to measure radiation from a large tower on the roof. Her meters were accurate and directional. The readings up on the roof, right under the tower were huge, as they also were on the top floor under a skylight. The myth of “the safest place to be is right under the tower” continues to be perpetuated by the wireless industry. Others would be “the power is too low to cause adverse health effects” and “the cheque is in the mail”.”

    cheers,

    Milt

    6) From Panayis Zambellis (UK):

    “I have been following the top floor story and the strength of the hypothesis that below these antennas is the safest place. I live immediately below (60 feet away) from a tall tower having pagers Tetra 2G and 3G and having taken meusuremnents (with com monitor) can confirm that the levels are certainly not minimal (at least 1-2.5 V/M)

    As a licensed radio ham I have made my own antennas on 2 metres 145 mhz and 70 cms 440 mhz and have a practical understanding of emmision patterns and side lobes. Low gain antennas as well as high gain antennas have significant side lobe patterns which are fractions of the main beam intensity but if in close proximity of possible health significance. I therefore find interesting the comments from Charles Claessens and Jean Pierre Lentin citing case studies suggesting similar findings to my observations.

    Perhaps it might be interesting for the sake of research that meusurements be made on the this particular top floor to obtain some working values on the intensity and mix of frequencies.”

    all the best

    Panayis Zambellis Luton UK

    7) From Katharina Gustavs:

    “As we all know, cancer is a multifactorial phenomenon and is rarely associated with a single environmental factor. As far as the EMR exposure levels in the RMIT building are concerned, it would be great if someone would dare measure all frequency bands across the entire electromagnetic spectrum with sufficiently sensitive equipment, taking peak values and not averaging over, for example, 6 minutes.

    In addition, it would be very beneficial to know what EMR exposure levels people with a brain tumor have at home where they sleep. And then it might become very interesting to also test bedrooms of people who worked at the RMIT for a long time and did not develop a brain tumor. During deep sleep humans have a great opportunity to repair their immune system, especially if plenty of melatonin is released at night. If this marvelous self-repair process is interfered with, we are much more prone to disease.

    Are there testing results from the previous investigation available to the public?

    I certainly hope that the scientists entrusted with this investigation do not limit themselves to only checking the compliance with official exposure guidelines, but have a “broadspectrum” look at the situation and help us learn more about environmental settings and brain health.”

    Katharina Gustavs
    Building Biology Consultant

    8) From Lachlan Mudge:

    “Just a few quick thoughts, which you’ve probably already had yourself:

    *Considering that the upper floor staff would’ve been situated in between a high number of staff and students (very high associated mobile phone traffic), and the various mobile phone towers on the roof, the exposure of the upper floor occupants would have to have been significantly elevated, much like the exposure received in a packed train or at a big music rock concert;

    *In addition, it’s likely that there would be a significant amount of WiFi technology utilized in the building, amongst other things;

    *In addition to this, there is the background radiation levels from all radiating devices in the surrounding, densely populated area

    *As well as the high frequency radiation, as you correctly pointed out, the upper floor staff would also have been exposed to significantly elevated ELF and perhaps also VLF and LF electromagnetic fields, relating to large energy users on the roof

    I think that it’s worth considering that any health effect from each discrete electromagnetic phenomena (whether that be high frequency radiation, low frequency fields, transients, ground currents etc.) is likely to be a co-factor in generating an adverse health effect, otherwise effects of individual phenomena recorded in the laboratories around the world would’ve been more conclusive and consistent, regardless of any perceived bias.

    Like others, I advocate a broad spectrum analysis, however unfortunately now that the press have got hold of the information, there is little hope that measurements recorded at the site will be accurate, based on the likelihood that those responsible for EMR emissions in the area will most likely reduce the power level from their antennae. Anyway, it’ll be interesting to see what turns up in the investigations so thanks for the info and keep me posted. All the best,”

    Lachlan Mudge

    Leave a reply →

Photostream