Daniel Massa
Presumptive ethics and mobile phone base stations
Despite growing awareness about harmful radiation from mobile phone base stations, Maltese policymakers still embrace ostrich policies of burying their heads in the sand.
The Maltese Department of Health Information, briefed to "analyse and disseminate health information", remains silent about emergent and newly-identified non-thermal biological health risks from electromagnetic radiation.
Without conducting a single epidemiological survey, the department presumes to inform the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa) "that there are no adverse effects generated from these antennae."
In turn, Mepa chairman Austin Walker presumes that the MCA "continuously monitors emissions in line with World Health Organisation information".
The result of this ethically reprehensible presumption is that in Malta, electro-sensitive people ceaselessly endure headaches, sleep disruption, memory impairment, depression, frequency of seizures in epileptics and other conditions.
With over 2,200 antennae Malta must have the highest concentration of electromagnetic smog in Europe - 10 times the UK density.
Profit motives have led to a quasi-complete relaxation of morality. The Maltese Curia hosts 43 antennae on its property - if the "aesthetics" are right, it's no problem. The Italian Bishops' Conference rules out use of church buildings for purposes unconnected with worship. Alien to the sanctity of Catholic churches, mobile phone masts "compromise the univocality and visibility of Christian symbols" in a multicultural society.
The Church in Malta, however, seeks moral comfort in arguing that the "scientific findings are sometimes conflicting in nature" and in devoutly presuming that the local authorities follow "international guidelines approved by WHO and the European Union which sets the levels of mobile phone radiation".
WHO is aware that scientists now agree that potential health risks have intensified. Indeed its own Fact Sheet 263 evaded WHO censors, confirming that "with respect to strength-of-the-evidence based on epidemiological studies of childhood leukaemia, the IARC has concluded that electromagnetic fields are possibly carcinogenic." More recent research determined that current "safe" threshold levels for childhood leukaemia and breast cancer are near 0.1mT. This is 1,000 times below the current ICNIRP guideline.
Maltese stakeholders know that in April 2009 the European Parliament approved by an overwhelming majority - 559 against 22 - a resolution tabled by Belgian MEP Frédérique Ries on health concerns associated with electromagnetic fields (EMFs). This resolution sends strong signals to WHO, our MCA and all ostrich stakeholders to stop hiding their heads in the sand. It tasks the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies with assessing scientific integrity to "forestall cases of risk, conflict of interest, or even fraud".
Various sources have confirmed leukaemia clusters near mobile masts, radiation from which damages human DNA.
The good news is that the human body normally repairs DNA breaks. However, the December 2008 issue of Leukaemia and Lymphoma reports that researchers at the University School of Medicine in Shanghai have discovered that children who carry a defective version of a gene that would otherwise help repair damaged DNA are four times more likely to develop full-blown leukaemia if they live within 100 metres of a mobile phone base station.
Children exposed to EMFs suffer more frequent DNA breaks. Besides, those who carry this modified gene or polymorphism cannot repair the damage. Childhood leukaemia is now generally believed to be initiated by a chromosomal rearrangement in the womb, followed by some 'environmental insult' after birth. Antennae-induced DNA breaks could be this 'environmental insult'. Children carrying this polymorphism are "particularly sensitive to carcinogenic effects" of electromagnetic radiation, making them extremely susceptible to leukaemia.
One may try preventing leukaemia by eliminating exposure to EMFs. However, try doing it in Malta. There are not very many places where your child can live 100 metres from mobile phone masts. Map it out and then... relocate. Pack your bags! Move!
Popular Stories
In Discussion
13 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joseph Schembri
Aug 17th 2009, 15:57
Roberto Magri: a microwave oven is operated only for seconds (unlike mobile masts which operate 24/7 with battery backup in case of power cuts). Apart from that microwave ovens are shielded properly to prevent escape of radiation unlike mobile base transmitters which are placed in the 'best' positions possible for the radiation to reach everyone.
Meanwhile WiFi may also turn out to be a concern and home owners should adopt the precautionary principle and use traditional ways of connecting computers to the internet... you know good old wires...
Joseph Schembri
Aug 17th 2009, 14:29
@anthony vella and others concerned about this unprecedented (in malta) experiment on us: send an email to ACMalta [antennacautionmalta@gmail.com] stating your concerns. It is an emergent lobby group that is addressing this issue. You will be helping yourself, your children and the general population.
Joseph Schembri
Aug 17th 2009, 14:28
We are being used as laboratory rats because while there are a multitude of studies that show alarming effects there are also studies that show no deletirious effects.
How ridiculous can mepa get when up to a few years ago we had to apply and go to a lot of hassle to install a satellite dish receiver on a roof (This receives em radiation NOT transmits) and now the scandalous emitters of dangerous radiation are allowed to install their radiation transmitters anywhere.
Joseph Schembri
Aug 17th 2009, 14:27
The ICNIRP guidelines are ridiculous and yet they are adopted by many countries for the simple reason that there is nothing else. We and our children are participating in the greatest ever epidemiological study ever with outcome unknown.
The ICNIRP guidelines are based on the heating effects of electromagnetic radiation which is scientifically ridiculous. It is like saying that exposure to gamma rays at levels below which they do not cause heating is safe!
Galea. L
Aug 17th 2009, 09:30
(2)
Maximum voltage will be developed in humans between approximately 30MHz-300MHz due to the size of the human body acting as an antenna. Penetration depth of the RF field also depends on frequency.
As regards high power TV transmitters normally the antennas are high up on the mast so that even right under the mast it is probable that you will not be exposed to high radiation due to antenna patterns, but I will keep clear of them just in case if I do not know the field strength where I will be standing. It would be another matter for people at roof level where high gain antennas are used at or slightly higher than roof level and they are in the major lobe of the antenna radiating high power. It is always prudent to be conservative just in case.
Galea. L
Aug 17th 2009, 09:30
Roberto Magri
The Dingli and other radars normally operate around 10GHz not 1.2 GHz. The effective radiated power may be even megawatts depending on the antenna gain and beamwidth, but it is pulsed with very short pulses and therefore the average power will be very low, perhaps averaging even as low as 2 watts and exposure will be once every turn of the antenna for a beamwidth of approximately 1degree so it gets over you very quickly. You will also be in the far field of the antenna unless you are extremely close to within a few metres.
You are right that the mobile phone is much nearer to your head and that should worry you. Assuming that base stations use 25W transmitter power, why does the MCA and Service providers not want to publish the gain and radiation patterns of their antennas, whether they use downward beam tilt and if so at what degrees? A very modest 10dB gain antenna increases the 25Watts to 250W ERP, a 13dB antenna increases it to 500W, a 16dB to 1000 Watts etc. of constant power not pulsed power.
Galea. L
Aug 17th 2009, 00:50
(2)
Maximum voltage will be developed in humans between approximately 30MHz-300MHz due to the size of the human body acting as an antenna. Penetration depth of the RF field also depends on frequency.
As regards high power TV transmitters normally the antennas are high up on the mast so that even right under the mast it is probable that you will not be exposed to high radiation due to antenna patterns, but I will keep clear of them just in case if I do not know the field strength where I will be standing. It would be another matter for people at roof level where high gain antennas are used at or slightly higher than roof level and they are in the major lobe of the antenna radiating high power. It is always prudent to be conservative just in case.
Galea. L
Aug 17th 2009, 00:40
Roberto Magri
The Dingli and other radars normally operate around 10GHz not 1.2 GHz. The effective radiated power may be even megawatts depending on the antenna gain and beamwidth, but it is pulsed with very short pulses and therefore the average power will be very low, perhaps averaging even as low as 2 watts and exposure will be once every turn of the antenna for a beamwidth of approximately 1degree so it gets over you very quickly. You will also be in the far field of the antenna unless you are extremely close to within a few metres.
You are right that the mobile phone is much nearer to your head and that should worry you. Assuming that base stations use 25W transmitter power, why does the MCA and Service providers not want to publish the gain and radiation patterns of their antennas, whether they use downward beam tilt and if so at what degrees? A very modest 10dB gain antenna increases the 25Watts to 250W ERP, a 13dB antenna increases it to 500W, a 16dB to 1000 Watts etc. of constant power not pulsed power.
Roberto Magri
Aug 16th 2009, 17:45
@ Galea L.
I agree with you but here are some facts: - Typical GSM 900MHz Base station power (considering losses etc.) = 25W similar to those operating on 1800MHz.On the other hand, typical mobile phone transmitting powr is around 1W-2W. Now these figures are the absolute maximum. In reality both mobile phone and base stations regulate their power depending on the distance - so if mobile phone is far away, the power increases and vice versa. Thus in reality, i prefer being in the vicinity of a mobile phone mast - in that way the mobile phone (that i am keeping a couple of centimetres from my brain) is using the least possible power. Frankly i am more worried on the coastal radar installations (and dingli radar for all that matters) - Frequency used here is around 1.2GHz and power is in the kilowatts. What about the residents in the Dingli area. Also what about the high powr TV transmitters (running 10KW at a frequency of 400MHz-800MHz .... quite near the GSM 900MHz band used by mobile phones). My point is: why complain about mobile phone base station masts and not on such installations?
Galea. L
Aug 16th 2009, 15:51
Roberto Magri
It does not concern power only but also frequency.
I Million watts of Radio frequency power on 1 MHz will not cause as much damage as 100 watts on microwave. As regards microwave ovens they contain the radiation within the oven itself. Depth of penetration of radio waves into the body depends upon the frequency, while there is a wide frequency range where the body absorbs more energy dues to its physical size. The frequency range is rather wide because people may be babies or grown ups, thin or fat etc...
Even simply using an electric welding set causes exposure to radiation as anyone who does not use clothing while welding will get burned as if he had stayed in the sun. This is apart from infra red radiation which would melt and attach contact lenses to the retina if no dark glass guard is used.
As a general interest, servicemen used to expose themselves to radiation from radar antennas to render themselves temporarily infertile. This was of course before the danger to which they were exposing themselves became known. However warnings were always there, such as NEVER to look into a waveguide while transmission was on.
anthony vella
Aug 16th 2009, 15:50
i dont like mobile phone antennae on rooftops-there are 4 of these antennae very close to where i live-and i know many others who hate them as well as i do, but what can one do about them except wish for them to disappear!!! there are so many health hazards these days connected to everything around you ie fruit and vegetable deseases, animal diseases, jelly fish even on shore, it seems even the air we breathe is not very safe any more!!! but lets not see the bad side of things, lets be positive about life-at the end people will come to their senses, worse comes to worse as in the cigarettes and asbestos situation. in the meantime people are split between those who are making money from renting their rooftops together with telephone companies, and those innocent people nearby who can do nothing to stop any radiation which may be causing harm to them. we may have to choose between the love for money or the love for healthy life. one has to note that with certain health problems even money is not a cure.
Roberto Magri
Aug 16th 2009, 15:29
@ Peter Murray
So you don't use any mobile phones, microwave ovens (available in every home), TV broadcast antenna, Radio broadcast, antenna, Wifi (available in schools and public places already!!), bluetooth handsfree kit etc. etc - Are you aware of the power emitted by the above mentioned electronic devices? TV and Radio broadcast antenna typically use multiple kilowatts to cover the whole nation. So if you think that the multitude of low power mobile base station masts are the problem, i suggest you think again! There are literally tens of devices around you which are emitting emf.
Peter Murray
Aug 16th 2009, 11:37
Nice work Daniel in higlighting the dangers of these "monstrosities"(aka mobile phone antennae)however,you have only scratched the surface of the true perilous nature of these ugly beasts.The authorities claim that no known side-effects or directly linked illnesses are attributable to these antennae which not only clearly flies in the face of proven scientific and medical evidence but more crucially is not substantiated by any indisputable evidence to prove this unharmful to health theory.Ergo they are playing a form of Russian Roulette with our and our children's health.Not too long ago cigarettes and asbestos posed absolutely no harm to people,all confirmed by the appropriate authorities as similar to these mobile phone masts.They will undoubtedly claim that no comparison exists between these now proven, through an immeasureable loss of life and attributable illnesses directly contributable to these previously "benign" materials and products,and the masts -yet how can they be so sure?Are we waiting for duelling-banjo type mutants to emerge or worse still await large scale illnesses to be directly linked or worse case scenario ..deaths.Yet this morbid outlook has already occurred and is ongoing, yet due to the monies involved this is being ignored.May their God forgive them ,for I will not!