Residents' association launches campaign against telephony base stations

Pamela Hansen

Mar 12th 2010, 13:51

George Debono is not right when he says "people make a fuss about things for which there is no evidence of harm but for something like our air quality nobody says a word".
A lot of words have been said by many on th subject.

George Debono

Mar 11th 2010, 21:48

To P Pace Balzan

RE My comment

-"Higher doses are received from the hand held phones than can EVER be received at a distance from the antenna."

Though I still believe this to be the case, I stand corrected because I cannot support it with evidence…

Thanks

G

Charles Tabone

Mar 11th 2010, 20:27

@ George Debono
The above article deals with mobile base antennas and not air pollution. No one can deny that there is a serious problem regarding air pollution but adding another health risk to the equation isn’t going to make things better.

What worries me most is that in spite of arguments against the said antennas citizens cannot even apply the EU precautionary principle. If someone decides to erect an antenna and bombard you 24/7 with EMR, one can literally do nothing about it. I do every single thing within my power to safeguard my family, I don’t smoke, use a mobile phone near my kids, eat healthy and exercise. Who are you or any mobile telephone company to have the right to invade my home and then have the cheek to tell me it is only a thousand times less harmful than a smoke emitting bus?

P.Pace

Mar 11th 2010, 19:56

@ G.Tabone

Good for you! for doing your best to stop air pollution but that doesn't justify what we are concerned about. If all the people stand up against what is harmful to our health, Malta will be a better place for all of us.
If your a doctor you should be concerned about all issues including the issue of all these Mobile Antennae in densely populated areas
We have Mobile Antennae within meters of our children and there is enough research showing that they are harmful even if the World Health Organization haven't yet come forward, (I wonder why??). Check out how many people got sick before the WHO came forward about asbestos or tabacco when warnings first came out.
While your at it look up the Precautionary Principle!! That is all we are asking for!
If anyone thinks they aren't harmful they either haven't done enough research or there is a conflict of interest somewhere!!!!!!!!!! So far there is a lot more proof showing they are harmful than there is that they are safe! Please don't quote anyone government organizations as they are all bias.

Mario Borg

Mar 11th 2010, 19:53

@ George Debono.
I agree with you about the problem of street pollution but can you kindly stick to the topic? We are talking about electrogagnetic radiation here and it's harm to humans. Lets try to tackle a problem at a time.

P Pace Balzan

Mar 11th 2010, 18:51

@ George Debono The 4 meter zone is known as the protected parallel piped . It is also known as the forbidden zone. In certain countries (Close to schools and residential areas) this has been extended to 10meters . The bulk of the effect is usually nulled out at a distance of over 25meters (not 4meters.) The basic solution (and there is a solution) is to limit the transmission power to 1% of the maximum allowable limit and to keep the antennas at a distance of at least 25meters from local residences/offices/schools. -"Higher doses are received from the hand held phones than can EVER be received at a distance from the antenna." This is also an incorrect statement which is dished out by service providers. Ex: Getting hit by a ball travelling at 40mph will most certainly not have the same effect as getting hit by a truck travelling at a similar speed. Re air pollution; you are most certainly correct. It is a serious issue however there is no easy solution. The links that you asked for can be found within this link : http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/11/22/l6.html

George Debono

Mar 11th 2010, 17:06

Mr Tabone

A question for you:

As a doctor, I am seriously worried about the harm to our health in Malta from air pollution. My worry is backed by massive medical/scientific evidence (pease read that report!)

Why are you not worried about this?

This is what gets my goat, you see: ---- people make a fuss about things for which there is no evidence of harm but for something like our air quality nobody says a word and everybody chooses to ignore the evidence which proves that it is harmful. .

I just don't get it ! Can you please explain why the threat from pollution in our streets doesn't worry you ?

G

George Debono

Mar 11th 2010, 16:58

To P Pace Balzan

A)………(I am ) " incorrect when you state that there are no known hazards"
What I quote is the official position of the British Medical Association.

1) So far there has been no evidence of harm.
2) At a distance greater than 4 Metres the radiation is theoretically too weak to be of any danger.
3) Greater doses are received from the hand-held apparatus.

B)……………" W.H.O. till this day still claim that they have unquantified gaps in knowledge"…………. can you give me the reference and I will add it to my equation.

I base my statements as a person who keeps himself up-to-date. As I said earlier The point is this: Higher doses are received from the hand held phones than can EVER be received at a distance from the antenna.

A temperature rise of 1 degree C has been recorded in hind-brains of subjects after use of mobiles. Not funny, this.

So, again, it's not the antenna BUT the hand held apparatus which can be dangerous and this applies especially to children.

Can I be clearer and more backed up by the latest information?

G.

George Debono

Mar 11th 2010, 16:53

To…….M. Tabone

A) Why are you protecting (Mobile phone companies) them so much

Now that's rich!!!!! - I have been trying to protect people in Malta from exposure to pollution.

I spent 8 months researching the available data and wrote an 80,000 word report on Malta's energy and pollution problem.

But nobody is worried. Malta loves its old smoking buses and the lucrative construction industry and then we all love our cars so much. Yet there is massive evidence of harm to adults and children from traffic pollutants which has been proven by the American Cancer Society and other huge scientific surveys.

Please, Mr Tabone, download the report " Towards a Low Carbon Society - the Nation's Health, Energy Security and Fossil Fuels" from http://www.tppi.org.mt/cms/index.php/reports and read part IV of the report. And then we'll talk.

AND, please note, I am not protecting any companies. I don't even own a mobile!

What frustrates is that people worry about the wrong thing - something where there is no evidence and yet are not in the least upset when a bus blows smoke at people in the street. Malta's pollution levels are much more worth worrying about than mobile antennas.

G

P Pace Balzan

Mar 11th 2010, 13:20

@ George Debono
You are very incorrect when you state that there are no known hazards (re topic in question).

The W.H.O. till this day still claim that they have unquantified gaps in knowledge .
The main issue relating to proof (or gaps in their knowledge) (ie:cause and effect) is one of ethics.

Would you like to subject your family to experimentation? Perhaps a pregnant relative of yours!!!!!!!! (I doubt it)

The precautionary principle should be followed. The EU's resolution should be applied. If not why did we opt to define the precautionary principle or at that join the EU!!!!!

Please answer.

M. Tabone

Mar 11th 2010, 12:28

@ George Debono

What is it with you and Mobile phone companies?
Why are you protecting them so much?
Hmm......it makes one wonder.....

M. Tabone

Mar 11th 2010, 12:24

I admire people like Mr Trower.
Mr Trower keep up the good work, because it's "foreigners" like you that can help us out.
SEEMS LIKES THE ONLY CONCERS THAT SOME LOCALS HAVE IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY WILL LOSE AND NOTHING ELSE!
I would also like to some kind of written documentation from Mobile Companies/ the Government that states that mobile antennae don't cause health hazards.

Doreen Sultana

Mar 11th 2010, 12:09

In a lot of other countries, mobile phone antennae aren't allowed to be erected close to the General Public. It's not the case for Malta! For a couple of hundred of Euros you can get one installed on your roof top! ONLY IN MALTA

Amazingly when you write to the the mobile company and to Mepa, they tell you that it's Safe, but NO ONE WRITES THIS IN BLACK AND WHITE, WHO IS TO CARRY THE RESPONSIBILITY IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO YOU. X'hin timrat tkun imrad!

At the moment there are four mobile companies.....what's going to happen if three more decide to start to operate? Are we going to end up with Mobile Phone antennae in every corner?

P.Pace

Mar 11th 2010, 00:33

@ C. Farrugia
First of all I NEVER said as you quoted -
'foreigners are so much better in proving facts and the Maltese are complete idiots in the area"
Secondly if there are any Maltese with as much expertise as Barrie Trower I am sure he or she would speak up against Mobile Base Stations being put up residential areas.
Also for your information Barrie Trower wasn't the only person speaking at the Social Affairs Committee but there was a MALTESE Professor giving a presentation very much against Mobile Base Stations being put up residential areas.
By the way MCA only check against the Thermal Effect of EMF and not the Non Thermal Effect which is what we are campaigning about! WE WANT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE which the EU suggests.

Patrick Vassallo

Mar 10th 2010, 23:13

To those who think that they know it all, those who want others to believe so, and to ALL TELEPHONY COMPANIES:

Please cut the crap, put your money where your mouth is, and give us Maltese citizens written lifetime guarantees that these base stations are harmless - we don't want much, just WRITTEN LIFETIME GUARANTEES - and by the way, I'm talking about our children's lifetime.

Keith Camilleri

Mar 10th 2010, 23:13

Lately, if i'm not mistaken on this news paper, there was an article saying that mobile phones could potentially cure some form of disease. Can we grow up and do more creative things like WORK please.

George Debono

Mar 10th 2010, 22:44

To Charles Tabone

RE "……. Can anyone please put my “paranoia” to rest by naming just one molecular biologist who conducted research on EMR’s and found that they pose no ill affects? (I'll spare you the research, there aren't any!) If EMR is so safe, why then when in 2006 I wrote to the Health Department and the MCA for a written guarantee that EMR pose no health hazards, this demand was turned down……….."

OK - I'm not a molecular biologist - but - yes the type of radiation emitted from mobile telephony can be a cause of adverse health effects in sufficiently high dosage - well, nobody would be happy about putting his head (or pet budgericar) in a micro-wave oven which delivers extremely high doses .

The point is this: Higher doses are received from the hand held phones than can EVER be received at a distance from the antenna.

A temperature rise of 1 degree C has been recorded in hind-brains of subjects after use of mobiles. Not funny, this.

So, again, it's not the antenna BUT the hand held apparatus which can be dangerous.

Our smoke-emitting buses are 1000 times more dangerous

(dr) G Debono

C. Farrugia

Mar 10th 2010, 22:35

P. Pace, I have no shares in any operator, but I still totally agree with those to commented earlier. Since according to you, foreigners are so much better in proving facts and the Maltese are complete idiots in the area, I might suggest the team organizing Mobile Monday to try and bring an expert on the subject in the future. As A.Coppini said, there is actually an advantage of having more rather than less base stations. Fewer base stations means having to jack up the transmission power to reach longer distances. More base stations on the other hands means reducing the power because first of all, you don't need it, and secondly, if it was set too high, cells would interfere with each other.

By the way, the MCA does EMF audits every now and then, and has never detected any dangerously high power. Actually all the values are very low. You may want to see the results here: http://www.mca.org.mt/infocentre/openemf.asp

One final word, if you want to know what interests I have, I do have a personal interest that mobile telephony keeps improving. No commercial reson - just personal. I also happen to be the webmaster of maltameter.com.

George Debono

Mar 10th 2010, 22:30

On the other hand, even though there is no evidence of harm to date, handheld mobile phones could conceivably be harmful and there are still some concerns about possible long-term adverse effects on the brain in children from mobile phone use. This is simply because hand-held mobile telephones emit microwaves while held pressed tightly against the ear – literally within one inch of our hind-brains.

For this reason the British Medical Association and other expert bodies, recommend that the use of mobile phones by children should be strictly restricted. This makes sense while anxiety over the antenna is misplaced.

So - if you see kids using a mobile - they are possibly at risk but the antennae are no more dangerous than sunshine (which also radiates infra red...)

PLEASE be more realistic and lobby against something which has been shown beyond doubt to be harmful as our excess traffic pollution.

G

George Debono

Mar 10th 2010, 22:26

RE "… A residents' association has launched a national campaign to raise awareness about the possible harmful effects of electrogagnetic radiation from base stations used for mobile telephony.

What a waste of time….it really is inconceivable how people fear what they can see - like antennae - but not what is mostly invisible but also present like pollution from our buses (this IS visible actually) , our construction industry and our own cars…. WHY does
nobody worry about traffic pollution which has been SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN, beyond all doubt, to be harmful to health - and this includes children. (see Part IV of "Towards a Low Carbon Society - the Nation's Health, Energy Security and Fossil Fuels. Download http://www.tppi.org.mt/cms/index.php/reports )

This is the official view of the British Medicine association: There is no scientific evidence that mobile phone base station antennas are a cause of adverse health effects. Neither is there any theoretical reason hat this might be so provided that people are not habitually nearer than 4 metres to the antenna. It is simply a matter of distance from the source.

Continued…………….

Robert Agius

Mar 10th 2010, 21:44

Let me start off by saying I don't pretend to be an expert on the subject but I advise people not to be so foolish when stating a study found this and anther found that. I would like to point something about research. I would say a healthy dose of scepticism is wise. This isn't something as simple as finding out if the world goes round. It is not based solely on technology either. Its tested over years with too many factors involved to ever be reliable.

I am not suggesting paranoia or anything similar however. Just caution and making sure things are monitored well so as to keep in line laws and international standards. Anyone against that?

@ I Tabone

No worries I'm not paranoid but it seems I'm misinformed or lack knowledge that ALL the scientific studies say the contrary of what Mr Towers says. Excuse my ignorance in that case but please do enlighten us on where we can find such information and CONCRETE proof.

@ All complaining he is foreign, why don't you complain about all studies that the government does using foreign experts?

Charles Tabone

Mar 10th 2010, 21:31

@ I Tabone
To all those who want us to believe that mobile phones and mobile base antennas are safe, who are they trying to fool. That largest study conducted on electromagnetic radiation (EMR) to date was conducted by Dr. George Carlo, PhD, JD, an epidemiologist and medical scientist who, from 1993 to 1999, headed the first telecommunications industry-backed studies into the dangers of cell phone use. But he ran afoul of the very industry that hired him when his work revealed preventable health hazards associated with cell phone use.

Can anyone please put my “paranoia” to rest by naming just one molecular biologist who conducted research on EMR’s and found that they pose no ill affects? (I'll spare you the research, there aren't any!) If EMR is so safe, why then when in 2006 I wrote to the Health Department and the MCA for a written guarantee that EMR pose no health hazards, this demand was turned down.

Around 60 years ago paranoid, misinformed individuals were claiming that there was a link between cigarettes and lung cancer; it took 30 years for their paranoia to become fact.

Peter Paul Borg

Mar 10th 2010, 20:23

What levels of microwave exposure were the captured spies you interviewed exposed to?? What was the transmit output power of the microwave weapons you made reference to in the interview?? And how were the microwave weapons you referred to used??

A weapon is destructive, it is ironic how you can compare this to a mobile telephony base station.

Mobile telephony has been used widely in the world for decades. Can you kindly present one single case of conclusive evidence to justify your argument that mobile telephony base stations are detrimental??

How seriously can microwave British expert, Mr. Barrie Trower's comments be taken when his reply to the question as to how much exposure was required for the damage to occur was " I don't know that we know" Yet he knows that a mobile telephony antenna up on a pole on the roof of a house can be compared to a destructive microwave weapon simply because both use microwave.

I would not be at all surprised if Mr. Trower also warns us on the use of microwave ovens? The latter also uses microwave frequencies to function.

P.Pace

Mar 10th 2010, 18:52

The Social Affairs Meeting at Pariament is tonight (Wed 10 March) from19.30 onwards..

P.Pace

Mar 10th 2010, 18:39

It is so obvious that the people commenting so far are biased and either work for a phone company or have shares and maybe even a Mobile Antenna on their roof. If you are so certain bring your FORIEGNER to prove that they ARE SAFE!! About Barrie Trower you can do your own research on the intenet and you will see that he also has given advise to the UK government. You are all free to come to convince us otherwise, and express your thoughts at Parliament tonight at 21.30. Its open to the public!!!

F.Fenech

Mar 10th 2010, 17:50

Can we know who this self proclaimed expert is and what qualifications he holds? if any

l tabone

Mar 10th 2010, 17:50

The usual paranoia, misinformation and lack of knowledge. As for those people who felt weird and of course are inventing stuff that its the mobile technology making them feel weird should 1st check what they are eating and what other causes they have instead of blaming the 1st thing they dont like.

As for the Barrie guy well the usual know it all foreigner that knows more then all the world put together. What he says goes against all the scientific reasearch going on. I wonder what concrete proof he has on his claims.


As for qortin people sure hope you do not go around with mobile phones in your pockets. If i were the 3 mobile providers on the isalnd I would just switch off the repeaters in their areas and send them back to 1980 and see how they fend

Peter Mangion

Mar 10th 2010, 16:55

PLEASE TELL THIS FOREIGNER, that a few years ago a certain Dr Anna Mallia formed an NGO to fight this phenomenon of Mobile antennae, claiming that she had evidence of the health hazards which such antennae wwere provoking. But her campaign was short lived since NO medical evidence or scientific evidence was ever produced to further their claims against antennae or to counter the mobile phone companies' evidence that such antennae were not a health hazard. In fact US Studies proved that there was no evidence of any health hazards. Now comes this foreigner to repeat this same campaign. Sorry mate but your campaign is doomed to failure, unless you prove what you are claiming, that mobile antennae are really a health hazard. Malta does not need any foreigners to incite trouble on our shores.

A Coppini

Mar 10th 2010, 16:40

Can someone teach Barry Trower about the concept of density? The more base stations there are, the LESS power they need to emit to cover a given region.

The -possibly justified- paranoia is more of a concern in truly rural areas. And by rural area I don't mean 1 house per 100m Bidnija, I mean 1 house per 50km areas.

Anyone can take a look at http://www.mca.org.mt/infocentre/openemf.asp to see that practically all base stations are running at a fraction of their normal power due to their high density, with the only one running close to the average being the one in Cirkewwa since it needs to cover the Malta Gozo channel.

Finally, the real danger lies in putting your mobile phone close to your ear since there is a transmitter in there that is as powerful as the one in the base station... so I look forward to seeing the members of Kortin Residents Association ditching their mobile phones and carrying Telecards.

N. Borg

Mar 10th 2010, 16:36

do that and then start complaining that you cannot make phone calls!