Ivan Camilleri in Brussels
Council of Europe seeking ban on mobile phones in schools
The Council of Europe has issued a new draft resolution calling for a ban on the use of mobile phones and Wi-Fi technology in all schools in its 47 member states, including Malta.
Mobile phones should be banned from schools to protect children from potentially harmful wireless signals, says the resolution, based on a report approved by the CoE’s Environment Committee.
However, Environmental Health director John Attard Kingswell said there was no cause for alarm and stressed that Malta was following developments closely.
“This is still a draft resolution and there still needs to be plenty of discussion on the subject. If and when the European Union issues any legislation we will adopt it,” he said when contacted.
The report, issued two weeks ago, stresses that European governments should “take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields” emitted from wireless devices, including mobile phones.
In the report, which was downplayed by the European Commission, the committee said it was crucial to avoid repeating the mistakes made when public health officials were slow to recognise the dangers of asbestos, tobacco smoking and lead in petrol.
The draft report, unanimously approved by the committee, will be debated by the CoE’s Parliamentary Assembly. The views do not necessarily represent those of the Committee of Ministers, the council’s decision-making body consisting of member states’ foreign ministers.
It has long been claimed that the electromagnetic radiation emitted from wireless devices, including smart phones, broadband routers and cordless telephones, could harm brain development. However, experts never reached a conclusive decision.
The resolution coincides with a World Health Organisation warning issued last week that mobile phone use can increase possible cancer risk. Before this announcement, WHO had always assured consumers no adverse health effects had been established. WHO experts meeting in France last week warned that the use of mobile phones might increase the risk of developing certain types of brain tumours and consumers should consider ways of reducing exposure to such appliances.
A working group of 31 scientists from 14 countries meeting at WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer ( IARC) said a review of all the available scientific evidence suggested mobile phone use should be classified as “ possibly carcinogenic”.
The classification, which puts mobile phone use in the same broad IARC cancer risk category as lead, chloroform and coffee, could spur the UN health body to review its guidelines on mobile phones, the scientists said. However, they agreed more lengthy and detailed research was needed before a more definitive answer on any link could be given.
The Malta Communications Authority said when contacted it was closely following the latest scientific developments from the Council of Europe and WHO.
However, both the Maltese telecoms regulator and the EU are insisting the use of such devices is “ presumed safe” and there is no cause for alarm.
Reacting to the latest developments, European Commission spokesman Aikaterini Apostola played down the issue saying there was no new scientific evidence that mobile phones caused cancer.
While making its clear the CoE had nothing to do with the EU and had no say as to how member states should act, Ms Apostola said all mobile and Wi-Fi equipment put on the EU’s market was “ presumed to be safe” as long as it conformed to its directives.
“EU standards were developed to respect the exposure limits proposed on the limitation of the exposure of the public to electromagnetic fields. The purpose of these exposure limits is to provide a high level of protection of the health of the public,” she said.
Ms Apostola said such scientific validity was regularly assessed and “ no scientific rationale could be found that would justify a change in the exposure limits”.
On its part, the MCA, which regulates mobile telephony in Malta, said that although health issues were not its competence, all Maltese communications networks, including those used for mobile telephony services, had to adhere to EU electromagnetic exposure limits.
“These limits were adopted by the EU and endorsed by WHO,” it insisted. Asked for his reaction after voting in favour of the CoE report, Nationalist MP Joseph Falzon, who sits on the organisation’s Environmental Committee, said these issues should be carefully analysed and studied as the subject was of a highly technical nature.
“Once potential hazards are identified and verified, appropriate measures should be taken to reduce to acceptable limits or eliminate, if possible, the risks involved.”
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
24 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
George Debono
Jun 9th 2011, 20:45
Let us inject some sense into all this arguing.
1) Mobile antennae -
Theory – they are safe because the intensity of radiation decays with the square of the distance from the mast. So, as long as does not stand near the antenna there is no danger.
Fact – there is so far no evidence of harm.
2) Handheld mobile.
Theory – there are theoretical grounds for presumed danger. 1) When held against the ear, the source of microwaves is about one inch away from the hind-brain tissue. 2) It has been shown that the hind brain temperature can rise by as much a 1 degree from mobile telephone use and 3) The growing brain is sensitive to exposure to abnormal influences. 4) The data so far have shown evidence that could indicate an excess of brain tumours – gliomas. 5) It can take many years (or even decades for the damage to become apparent. Cancer has a long “incubation period . This latency between exposure to the stimulus and appearance of cancer can be as long as 20 years. Therefore the lag or induction times for the effect of mobile phone use to become apparent must be taken into consideration in
epidemiological studies..
Ie “watch this space” ------------ The British Medical association recommends that children do not use mobile telephones. This make sense. Youngsters (or their parents) who think that they cannot live without them are welcome to be the guineapigs who might eventually deliver the proof of safety or harm in decades to come…. Very simple.
Nicholas Abela
Jun 9th 2011, 15:58
This is absolute rubbish to me. Just to be clear to everyone, I am a Junior College student. Why am I not for it? Primarily because mobile phones let us be more connected socially than we were able in our secondary years. Other than that, aren't we students already restricted to spend our secondary life in school without mobiles and such devices? Why are we to be restricted from finally being able to go to school with our electronic devices? Don't get me wrong, I agree that primary and secondary students shouldn't have mobile phones because at that stage since it's mandatory, a phone is a big distraction. But why ban it from school in general? Many teachers make use of phones to communicate with their students. I make use of it sometimes. And besides, putting a ban on mobile phones will only increase the chances of students rebelling and still bringing it to school.
Many will say that since I'm a student, I don't know what I'm talking about. But I think I do because mainly, I'm the one that's going through this. I'm pretty sure any fellow students that will read this article will think it to be outrageous and would say against it.
Also some of the content of this article is out of point. What does asbestos have to do with school?
Mr Peter Murray
Jun 9th 2011, 11:30
Dear Mr.Coppini,
I am sure I speak for all when I thank you for your erudite and professorially informed input with the result being that we can all rest reassured in that there is absolutely no harm from mobile phones or the masts used to generate signals to such devices.I seem to recall similar claims made by such enlightened individuals and self-proclaimed experts and industry analysts with regard to tobacco and asbestos and it would be interesting to learn if you have children and would allow them to use such unabated and unrestricted?Also how can you be so absolutely certain that no harm whatsoever can ever be inflicted by these devices and associated apparatus when clearly many eminently qualified people clearly express immense concern in this regard and back up such with scientific research to corroborate such concerns?It's called the Precautionary Principle and must be applied whenever there is even a scintilla of doubt and if we disregard historical mistakes made we are ultimately condemned to repeat them.
Mr wayne scicluna
Jun 9th 2011, 11:21
So these are no definite tests to show the a phone may cause cancer? Ok by all means, inform the public and and take the necessary steps but while you're there, pls take a moment of your precious time and enforce the law banning phones and driving! That certainly caused injuries or worse.
Mr Andrea Coppini
Jun 9th 2011, 10:29
To all complaining about mobile phone masts: Sorry to disappoint you, but the radiation from the mobile phone you carry in your pocket all day, or the microwave oven you have in your kitchen is far higher than what you will ever be exposed to from a GSM mast, especially in Malta.
The MCA publishes radiation tests for ALL microwave transmitters in Malta and Gozo at http://www.mca.org.mt/infocentre/openemf.asp. Short of the base station in Cirkewwa which tends to transmit at high power since it needs to provide coverage throughout the Malta/Gozo channel, all transmitters are set to a much, much lower level than the maximum power allowed. This is because Malta is very densely populated (no, really) while the capacity of a base station is finite. The carriers have no option but to install more base stations to cater for the increased capacity required per sq.km. Also, base stations transmit outwards, not downwards.
So, the irony of it all is that:
1) more base stations = less EM exposure
2) having a base station on your own roof is significantly less harmful than having one 500m away on someone else's roof.
Now as for the article, I cannot see how WiFi could be harmful, when it's about as powerful as a garage-door or car remote key.
Mr P Pace Balzan
Jun 9th 2011, 11:18
@Mr Andrea Coppini
Your statements are far from correct.
Ex1
A mobile phone mainly emits radiation in transmission mode whilst
a mobile phone mast continuously emits radiation.
This means that a person can control his/her exposure to radiation from his/her phone by limiting use whilst a person exposed to continuous radiation from a mobile phone mast can do nothing about it.
Ex2
Re your point 2 - pure garbage - buy yourself an electrosmog meter (or come and borrow mine) and find out for yourself.
Ex3
Mobile phone masts continuously emit EMF radiation - your garage key or your car key are only used for a max of 5 seconds a day.
S. Camilleri
Jun 9th 2011, 10:08
The concern being shown and some of the proposals are commendable. The hazards of putting a radio transmitter to the brian, especially in young children, have never been disproven so it is best to err on the side of caution.
However the overall reaction is typical knee-jerk EU nanny state ... Ban all phones AND Wifi!!! What next? Ban forks and knives in school cafererias? Why not have plastic windows and whilst at it, rubber flooring and padded walls in our schools?
Charlie Borg
Jun 9th 2011, 10:01
Oblivious of whether mobile phones are a danger or not, I think that it is a good move.
Gordon Lawrence
Jun 9th 2011, 17:47
i agree Mr Borg, they are in school to learn when i am in malta it amazes me the amount of young people with phones stuck to their ears i think they were born with them in their hands, and the way they can hack phones now it is a danger to youngsters who is at the other end they do a lot of shouting about dangers on the computers, they can do the same things on mobiles now e-mail and surf the net without the parents knowing about it
Joseph Borg
Jun 9th 2011, 09:47
I Fully agree that mobile phones should not be allowed in schools. Not because of wireless signals but to avoid distractions. Why should a 10 year old student run around with a mobile phone in a private school? Schools should provide computers for public use by students during break if students insists that they cannot read their mail from their mobile!
Mr Andrew Grech
Jun 9th 2011, 09:38
The nation's health should come first and foremost! Yes Sir it should.
Everybody knows that the no.1 killer is stress!
And what stresses a person the most (normally) is work.
So you see my friends work is our no.1 killer but i doubt any government would do anything about it.
Jokes apart, wouldn't it be simpler to just wear a head set or an ear piece and keep the electro magnetic waves away from one's head?
Lawrence Attard
Jun 9th 2011, 09:32
This is a welcome move! The dangers of wireless technology are very real. Yes they are hugely convenient but this does not negate their danger. Children are even more vulnerable because their enthusiasm to have phones and communicate at all times with their friends (including such things as sleeping with their phone next to their bed) makes them unable to appreciate the hazard. Unfortunately its easy to overlook what we dont see or feel.
Given the clout which the various communication networks here have, and we hope the authorities will not support the downplaying and "its-perfectly-safe" attitude which such companies will for obvious reasons try to maintain till the end (no pun intended) same as happened with the tobacco issue years back.
Darren Galea
Jun 9th 2011, 09:30
A very bad decision based on flimsy evidence nothing close to a scientific consensus. The most recent paper, soon to be published in Lancet Oncology, has this as a conclusion:
"The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited among users of wireless telephones for glioma and acoustic neuroma, and inadequate to draw conclusions for other types of cancers. The evidence from the occupational and environmental exposures mentioned above was similarly judged inadequate. The Working Group did not quantitate the risk; however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period)."
"Limited" and "Inadequate". The only thing they bring up is one case where there was a strong correlation...nothing more than a statistical ruse as all they did was highlight an outlier. Poor, poor stuff,
Mobiles could indeed cause cancer, but the evidence limited and far from conclusive.
Stefan Zammit
Jun 9th 2011, 09:48
Last year on the BMJ (if I remember correctly) there was an article which showed no correlation between antennas and incidence of cancer in neonates.
Not to mention the fact that there have been similar scares in the past, for example lung cancers and the tarmac laid for roads etc..
Christian Sciberras
Jun 9th 2011, 09:26
Long live that electronic noise revolution (!!)
Paul Micallef
Jun 9th 2011, 08:49
Very disappointed with Mr Attard Kingswell reaction. Malta should consider implementing the recommendations immediately not only for the mentioned reasons above but also for the fact that students use mobile phones in classes all the time texting friends from under the bench or table, distracting their concentration from the lessons.
Mr P Pace Balzan
Jun 9th 2011, 08:39
Another incorrect statement : "However, both the Maltese telecoms regulator and the EU are insisting the use of such devices is “ presumed safe” and there is no cause for alarm."
.
The above statement should make reference to the EU commissioner and not the EU since 95%+ of EU Meps stated that mobile phone masts are dangerous and that poorly proliferating masts should be repositioned.
The is a huge difference between the EU,the EU commissioner and the EU Meps.
Mr Stephen Florian
Jun 9th 2011, 08:30
And what about those mobile phone signal repeaters on the school rooftops, will anything be done about those as well ?
Mr D Borg
Jun 9th 2011, 09:56
That's right...they emit far more radiation than a mobile phone...and what's worst is their placement.
Charlie Borg
Jun 9th 2011, 10:00
I may agree with you. But are you prepared to dump your mobile phone? Don't get me wrong, please. We all want the cake and eat it: we all want the luxuries but we don't accept the negative points that these luxuries come with.
Mr Stephen Florian
Jun 9th 2011, 08:28
Good idea, only a little late perhaps.
Mr P Pace Balzan
Jun 9th 2011, 08:18
1-The title is incorrect it should include : Wireless networks and mobile phone masts.
2-I disagree with Environmental Health director John Attard Kingswell : The move should be immediate and fast. I have already spent well over Eur2,500 to distance my family from a poorly positioned mobile phone mast.
3-How long will it take the MCA to react ? A very big question mark!
Gino Borg-Marks
Jun 9th 2011, 09:08
I cannot agree with you more Mr. Pace Balzan. This situation, as usual, will end up being modelled and formed in a way as to rub salt in people's eyes and then wash it away with vinegar.
We have been hearing about the damage the mobile phone might be doing for a good 12 years, and although one will admit that it is sometimes a commodity, if there is the slightest doubt that it might be a health risk then common sense should prevail.
Obviously, we will be fed to believe that tests have been carried out and that there is absolutely no need for the public to worry........and the local telecommunication giants will then use the local media to show us a grin in their faces.
Clifton Calleja
Jun 9th 2011, 13:06
I totally agree with Mr Coppini. I work with a one of the 3 operators and can confirm that the radiation levels emitted from a local mobile operator base station are very low. The radiation levels are checked by the operator and even by the MCA and levels are recorded. Please note that even an old CRT tv ( the old type) emit more radiation than the base station itself..........................and we tested this ourselves! As previously said the mobile phone itself emits higher levels and although it's true that you can control how much you use it, remember that the mobile is exactly next to your head!!!
So please refrain from stating stupid satements that mobile base stations are causing cancers etc etc!!