Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
From Chris
Thought you might "like" the article below from yesterdays Guardian newspaper. Check out number six on the list. The article was published yesterday and is written by a thirty something twit of a journo who has no experience of esmog, and appears to be just regurgitate the party line of scientists.
Should you wish to complain to the guardian after read inf section 6, here is the information on how to do so from their website: How to contact the Guardian's readers' editor. It is the policy of the Guardian to correct significant errors as soon as possible and the paper has appointed a Readers' Editor to deal with questions and complaints from readers. The Guardian also has an Ombudsman to represent the interests of readers where the Readers Editor is unable to resolve a problem to the satisfaction of all parties.
Please quote the date of the article you have read. Readers may contact the office of the readers' editor by telephoning +44 (0) 20 7713 4736 between 11am and 5pm Monday to Friday excluding UK public holidays.
Email: reader@guardian.co.uk
Fax: 020-7239 9997.
Ian Mayes
The Guardian
119 Farringdon Road
London EC1R 3ER
Chris
Read the report in today’s Guardian news paper, I’ve enclosed my reply.
Guardian Unlimited | Science | Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
Best wishes
Eileen
-----Original Message-----
From: Eileen O'Connor
eileen@smokestackltd.co.uk
Sent: 20 May 2006 14:06
To: bad.science@guardian.co.uk
Subject: Message for Ben Goldacre
Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
Guardian Unlimited | Science | Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 20, 2006
The Guardian
Dear Mr Goldacre
I was disappointed to read your article in the paper today; it saddens me as I along with many people have genuinely suffered as a result of living 100 metres from a phone mast for over seven years. If only I had the opportunity to know what I know now, I might not have gone on to develop breast cancer at the age of 38 and would have realised the years of sleep problems had been connected to exposure to microwave radiation.
Thankfully Powerwatch offer a much needed and honest service, the main advice given by Alasdair Philips is to use mobile phones for emergency use only. If people followed this advice, we wouldn’t have a need for as many masts and the industry might adopt safer technology with more urgency. I’m sure you wouldn’t choose to have a mast outside the bedroom of your child.
Please find enclosed the latest information I have put together and make time to listen to the Dr George Carlo interview.
Dr George Carlo’s interview on EMF-Omega-News 13. May 2006 http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1957891/
If his predictions are right by 2015 we will be seeing the biggest health disaster the world has ever seen with 1 in 4 people experiencing health problems as a result of using mobile phones, especially children.
Your Cell Phone is Dangerous. A Special Radio Interview with Dr. George Carlo Dr. George Carlo, Ph.D, M.S., J.D, respected epidemiologist and public health scientist, headed the $28.5 million research program funded by the cell phone industry. Dr. Carlo has appeared on 20/20, 60 Minutes, World News Tonight, CBS News with Dan Rather and The Today's Show, as well as on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC. In July 2006, a documentary film of his work will be released in major theatres.
Association Vallisoletana de Afectad@s por las Antennas de Telecommunications - AVAATE
Best wishes
Eileen O’Connor
Trustee – EM Radiation Research Trust
--------
Please find enclosed a letter from Jean Philips to Ben Goldacre following today’s report.
Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
Guardian Unlimited | Science | Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
Ben Goldacre Saturday May 20, 2006
Best wishes
Eileen O’Connor
Dear Ben Goldacre,
I have been copied into some of the electronic communication that has been happening recently on the subject of electrical sensitivity.
My name is Jean Philips. I have been working with my husband Alasdair Philips for some 15 years, investigating the health effects attributed to the action of electromagnetic fields. We have a website http://www.powerwatch.org.uk and are affiliated to no government or industry. We are completely independent. I am also a trustee of Electrosensitivity-UK.
During this time I have become increasingly aware of the small, but significant number of people (about 3% of the population at a conservative estimate) who describe symptoms, which have been mentioned in other communications, which become worse in the presence of some EMF frequencies. They have been in contact with me through email, telephone or by letter.
There are a number of these who have other problems including psychiatric ones, probably a little greater than the percentage you would find in the population as a whole. I have about 10 years experience of working with people with psychiatric problems, and can usually recognise the overlap. I believe that the higher percentage is due to the fact that problems of recognition of, what to the sufferer is a very real problem, can lead to depression and anxiety, rather than these being the cause of the problem. I guess it is why they tend to turn to complementary practitioners who do not pass judgements as readily as many GPs.
The fact that some of these people are otherwise ill, does not rule out the fact that they may be electrically sensitive. By far the majority of people do not have any degree of psychiatric disorder, and are reacting to elecyromagnetic field exposure with physiological, neurological and cognitive changes that can make life incredibly difficult. There is a scale of sensitivity, and fortunately most people who have the symptoms are not at the extreme end.
This variation in severity can be a problem when studying the condition. EHS is not a clear-cut, yes you have it, no you don't sort of condition. Some people, like Gro Harlem Brundtland only react to mobile phone radiation, even if quite severely. She may be able to spend hours in front of a computer, remain unaffected by mobile phone mast radiation and be able to work under fluorescent lights all day without developing a headache.
EHS sufferers appear to react to different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, some to low frequency emissions (computers, fluorescent lights,etc.), some to high frequency (mobile phones, digital cordless phones, mobile phone masts, etc.) and some to both. Some will be slightly affected and others are unable to tolerate the sort of field levels that maybe you and I would tolerate happily for weeks on end. Sensitivity can develop suddenly, out of the blue, and can be initiated by non-EMFs, a common trigger being an unusual chemical reaction that results in chemical as well as electrical sensitivity.
I will be briefer, as you don't want a lecture, and this feels like it is becoming one.
Exposure levels in studies are difficult to standardise and will describe the people not sensitive to those frequencies or strengths that are being used, as not sensitive at all. People who are very sensitive cannot take part as they are too badly affected. I have spoken to many people who have had to drop out of the Rubin study and the ongoing Essex University study, because they were so ill after the first exposure they could not continue. There are other technical problems with many of the studies. Alasdair has advised on some and the protocols have been changed to correct the errors.
The study commissioned by the HPA which reported in 2005 (Definition, Epidemiology and Management of Electrical Sensitivity), included in section 4.5.5 that people with EHS when asked what helped reduce their symptoms on a rating scale of 1-6, where 6 was most effective, reported
4.5 - disconnecting electricity
4.3 - removing indoor source
4.2 - avoiding exposure.
This seems to be worth investigating further. Why does this work so well, if there is no involvement of EMFs? It is a question that needs looking into, as the other factors listed were not as effective at reducing symptoms.
It is difficult to curb personal passion at times, when you hear as I do, and others who represent people with EHS, many of whom are too ill to represent themselves, do, about the dreadful suffering that many people endure, made worse by disbelief and sometimes ridicule. It did not help the sufferers of ME and Gulf War Syndrome to be told it was all in the mind.
I am happy to speak to you further should you wish to do so.
Yours sincerely
Jean Philips
--------
Hello Ben,
With regard to your one-sided article http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
you suggest people to ask to be radiated by masts all night - very interesting. You ignore the difference between masts and phones: people don't talk on the phone all night, but masts radiate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and one cannot control it. In contrast, one can turn off the mobile phone- How is that for a "sober analysis of the data"? If you think mobile phones power is a negative thing - then why don't you just suggest people to limit their exopsure time to the phone instead of inviting a private antenna near their house? The answer may be in your sentence "critiques of character and finance are a poor substitute for a sober analysis of the data." The evidence based fact is that you did not disclose to the readers whether you are you paid by the companies. I suspect you used this argument as a red herring for not dealing with the real data (see below - the actual studies on masts) BECAUSE you have something to hide. Otherwise why don't you just simply and honestly reveal to the readers: are you paid by the industry or not?
I will invite a private antenna after you do that in reality, not by spreading irresponsible words on the paper.
BTW did you check with Alasdair Philips' COM device, how much your phone emits? I am sure you will change your tone after you do that.
And finally, here is a sober analysis of the data: http://www.starweave.com/masts/
Regards
Iris Atzmon.
--------
REPLY TO THE GUARDIAN
It is really shocking how Mr Goldacre is so happy to denigrate what Powerwatch are saying by implying that they are trying to persuade people to buy their products by scaring people!
Why is it acceptable to believe what the phone industry and government are saying when they stand to benefit in billions of pounds of profit from the industry?
Why belittle an individual who has to earn his money for his research somehow and can't get any from the industry or government as they don't like what he is saying?
I am very pleased that Powerwatch are providing us with some true information as to the science of the dangers of microwave radiation on living beings. It is the government and industry who are not to be trusted.
What would happen if there were a problem? Can you really see the government or industry admitting it? What about the law suits? What about the profits? What about the billions the government have got from the phone industry, how would they give it back?
Open your eyes and look at the research, there is plenty of it but don't ask the government to give it to you, look for the real researchers , ask them. You are supposed to be a journalist after all.
What did the tobacco industry say 30 years ago?
I have a physics degree and the independent research makes perfect sense.
I have bought Powerwatch's products and managed to shield the radiation out of my Mothers flat.
She has suffered ever since she moved in 1999 from a host of illnesses and been on deaths door 3 times in the last 6 years.
Last year when I became aware of the effects of microwave radiation after doing some research on the subject I bought a radiation monitor and took it to her house and found it full of radiation (below the guidelines as it always is).
All my mother's symptoms fitted with what doctors in Germany are describing.
She has had a blood test in Germany and a hair analysis and radiation damage is confirmed.
You can't say it is psychological since we did not know of these effects until one year ago after she was already very ill. We also didn't know there was a phone mast near her flat as it is on a rooftop and 500m away from her flat so we didn't notice it.
Since we have shielded her flat my mother is improving. She is 79 so conventional wisdom would not expect her to regain her energy!
Last year she was so fatigued that she could only get up 1 day in 7. Now she is out late at night with her friends. Her auto-immune lung disease has stabilised, her immune system is strengthened, her appetite has come back, the pains in her head gone and her sleep returned to normal.
If you stubbenly refuse to repeat in your paper anything but the industry/government view then you can't be surprised if people assume you are an industry spokesman. There are may people out there who know a lot more about the subject than you do. You won't even publish any letters like mine in the paper. I wonder why?
Yours
Sarah
Concerning: Phone mast on every street?
From: SylviaWright
Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:17:51 EDT
To: bad.science@guardian.co.uk
OK - maybe you are just trying to wind up everyone who is concerned about mobile phone masts into a frenzy - I want to tell you IT'S WORKED!!
I won't waste time and effort answering all of your extravagent statements, but suffice to say that one can choose whether to use the phone (low signal or high) - but one cannot choose to lose the mast (or turn it off) - it will be pulsing away 24/7 - just in case anyone wants to make the usual inane mindless calls we hear wherever we go.
I really wish you "science correspondents" would consult people (Powerwatch being one - HPA another) who know the facts and not just play to the gallery.
Regards
Sylvia Wright
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
--------
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin Weatherall
To: bad.science@guardian.co.uk
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2006 7:42 PM
Subject: Cell phone masts do severely harm people.
Ben Goldacre
It would be useful for you to speak to people who are harmed by cell phone masts before you write any more articles on the subject.
In Canada I know of several people who have been severely harmed by the effects of electro magnetic radiation. Their lives have been devastated by what they have been through and how they are still being harmed every day.
I have attached a few documents that may help you to understand the situation better.
If you are going to write stories when you are ignorant of the facts, it is better not to write at all, you are misinforming people who need to know.
Yours sincerely
Martin Weatherall
Ontario,
Canada.
http://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Goldacre
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Goldacre
From Chris
Thought you might "like" the article below from yesterdays Guardian newspaper. Check out number six on the list. The article was published yesterday and is written by a thirty something twit of a journo who has no experience of esmog, and appears to be just regurgitate the party line of scientists.
Should you wish to complain to the guardian after read inf section 6, here is the information on how to do so from their website: How to contact the Guardian's readers' editor. It is the policy of the Guardian to correct significant errors as soon as possible and the paper has appointed a Readers' Editor to deal with questions and complaints from readers. The Guardian also has an Ombudsman to represent the interests of readers where the Readers Editor is unable to resolve a problem to the satisfaction of all parties.
Please quote the date of the article you have read. Readers may contact the office of the readers' editor by telephoning +44 (0) 20 7713 4736 between 11am and 5pm Monday to Friday excluding UK public holidays.
Email: reader@guardian.co.uk
Fax: 020-7239 9997.
Ian Mayes
The Guardian
119 Farringdon Road
London EC1R 3ER
Chris
Read the report in today’s Guardian news paper, I’ve enclosed my reply.
Guardian Unlimited | Science | Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
Best wishes
Eileen
-----Original Message-----
From: Eileen O'Connor
eileen@smokestackltd.co.uk
Sent: 20 May 2006 14:06
To: bad.science@guardian.co.uk
Subject: Message for Ben Goldacre
Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
Guardian Unlimited | Science | Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 20, 2006
The Guardian
Dear Mr Goldacre
I was disappointed to read your article in the paper today; it saddens me as I along with many people have genuinely suffered as a result of living 100 metres from a phone mast for over seven years. If only I had the opportunity to know what I know now, I might not have gone on to develop breast cancer at the age of 38 and would have realised the years of sleep problems had been connected to exposure to microwave radiation.
Thankfully Powerwatch offer a much needed and honest service, the main advice given by Alasdair Philips is to use mobile phones for emergency use only. If people followed this advice, we wouldn’t have a need for as many masts and the industry might adopt safer technology with more urgency. I’m sure you wouldn’t choose to have a mast outside the bedroom of your child.
Please find enclosed the latest information I have put together and make time to listen to the Dr George Carlo interview.
Dr George Carlo’s interview on EMF-Omega-News 13. May 2006 http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1957891/
If his predictions are right by 2015 we will be seeing the biggest health disaster the world has ever seen with 1 in 4 people experiencing health problems as a result of using mobile phones, especially children.
Your Cell Phone is Dangerous. A Special Radio Interview with Dr. George Carlo Dr. George Carlo, Ph.D, M.S., J.D, respected epidemiologist and public health scientist, headed the $28.5 million research program funded by the cell phone industry. Dr. Carlo has appeared on 20/20, 60 Minutes, World News Tonight, CBS News with Dan Rather and The Today's Show, as well as on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC. In July 2006, a documentary film of his work will be released in major theatres.
Association Vallisoletana de Afectad@s por las Antennas de Telecommunications - AVAATE
Best wishes
Eileen O’Connor
Trustee – EM Radiation Research Trust
--------
Please find enclosed a letter from Jean Philips to Ben Goldacre following today’s report.
Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
Guardian Unlimited | Science | Why you should have a phone mast as close to your house as possible
Ben Goldacre Saturday May 20, 2006
Best wishes
Eileen O’Connor
Dear Ben Goldacre,
I have been copied into some of the electronic communication that has been happening recently on the subject of electrical sensitivity.
My name is Jean Philips. I have been working with my husband Alasdair Philips for some 15 years, investigating the health effects attributed to the action of electromagnetic fields. We have a website http://www.powerwatch.org.uk and are affiliated to no government or industry. We are completely independent. I am also a trustee of Electrosensitivity-UK.
During this time I have become increasingly aware of the small, but significant number of people (about 3% of the population at a conservative estimate) who describe symptoms, which have been mentioned in other communications, which become worse in the presence of some EMF frequencies. They have been in contact with me through email, telephone or by letter.
There are a number of these who have other problems including psychiatric ones, probably a little greater than the percentage you would find in the population as a whole. I have about 10 years experience of working with people with psychiatric problems, and can usually recognise the overlap. I believe that the higher percentage is due to the fact that problems of recognition of, what to the sufferer is a very real problem, can lead to depression and anxiety, rather than these being the cause of the problem. I guess it is why they tend to turn to complementary practitioners who do not pass judgements as readily as many GPs.
The fact that some of these people are otherwise ill, does not rule out the fact that they may be electrically sensitive. By far the majority of people do not have any degree of psychiatric disorder, and are reacting to elecyromagnetic field exposure with physiological, neurological and cognitive changes that can make life incredibly difficult. There is a scale of sensitivity, and fortunately most people who have the symptoms are not at the extreme end.
This variation in severity can be a problem when studying the condition. EHS is not a clear-cut, yes you have it, no you don't sort of condition. Some people, like Gro Harlem Brundtland only react to mobile phone radiation, even if quite severely. She may be able to spend hours in front of a computer, remain unaffected by mobile phone mast radiation and be able to work under fluorescent lights all day without developing a headache.
EHS sufferers appear to react to different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, some to low frequency emissions (computers, fluorescent lights,etc.), some to high frequency (mobile phones, digital cordless phones, mobile phone masts, etc.) and some to both. Some will be slightly affected and others are unable to tolerate the sort of field levels that maybe you and I would tolerate happily for weeks on end. Sensitivity can develop suddenly, out of the blue, and can be initiated by non-EMFs, a common trigger being an unusual chemical reaction that results in chemical as well as electrical sensitivity.
I will be briefer, as you don't want a lecture, and this feels like it is becoming one.
Exposure levels in studies are difficult to standardise and will describe the people not sensitive to those frequencies or strengths that are being used, as not sensitive at all. People who are very sensitive cannot take part as they are too badly affected. I have spoken to many people who have had to drop out of the Rubin study and the ongoing Essex University study, because they were so ill after the first exposure they could not continue. There are other technical problems with many of the studies. Alasdair has advised on some and the protocols have been changed to correct the errors.
The study commissioned by the HPA which reported in 2005 (Definition, Epidemiology and Management of Electrical Sensitivity), included in section 4.5.5 that people with EHS when asked what helped reduce their symptoms on a rating scale of 1-6, where 6 was most effective, reported
4.5 - disconnecting electricity
4.3 - removing indoor source
4.2 - avoiding exposure.
This seems to be worth investigating further. Why does this work so well, if there is no involvement of EMFs? It is a question that needs looking into, as the other factors listed were not as effective at reducing symptoms.
It is difficult to curb personal passion at times, when you hear as I do, and others who represent people with EHS, many of whom are too ill to represent themselves, do, about the dreadful suffering that many people endure, made worse by disbelief and sometimes ridicule. It did not help the sufferers of ME and Gulf War Syndrome to be told it was all in the mind.
I am happy to speak to you further should you wish to do so.
Yours sincerely
Jean Philips
--------
Hello Ben,
With regard to your one-sided article http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,1779393,00.html
you suggest people to ask to be radiated by masts all night - very interesting. You ignore the difference between masts and phones: people don't talk on the phone all night, but masts radiate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and one cannot control it. In contrast, one can turn off the mobile phone- How is that for a "sober analysis of the data"? If you think mobile phones power is a negative thing - then why don't you just suggest people to limit their exopsure time to the phone instead of inviting a private antenna near their house? The answer may be in your sentence "critiques of character and finance are a poor substitute for a sober analysis of the data." The evidence based fact is that you did not disclose to the readers whether you are you paid by the companies. I suspect you used this argument as a red herring for not dealing with the real data (see below - the actual studies on masts) BECAUSE you have something to hide. Otherwise why don't you just simply and honestly reveal to the readers: are you paid by the industry or not?
I will invite a private antenna after you do that in reality, not by spreading irresponsible words on the paper.
BTW did you check with Alasdair Philips' COM device, how much your phone emits? I am sure you will change your tone after you do that.
And finally, here is a sober analysis of the data: http://www.starweave.com/masts/
Regards
Iris Atzmon.
--------
REPLY TO THE GUARDIAN
It is really shocking how Mr Goldacre is so happy to denigrate what Powerwatch are saying by implying that they are trying to persuade people to buy their products by scaring people!
Why is it acceptable to believe what the phone industry and government are saying when they stand to benefit in billions of pounds of profit from the industry?
Why belittle an individual who has to earn his money for his research somehow and can't get any from the industry or government as they don't like what he is saying?
I am very pleased that Powerwatch are providing us with some true information as to the science of the dangers of microwave radiation on living beings. It is the government and industry who are not to be trusted.
What would happen if there were a problem? Can you really see the government or industry admitting it? What about the law suits? What about the profits? What about the billions the government have got from the phone industry, how would they give it back?
Open your eyes and look at the research, there is plenty of it but don't ask the government to give it to you, look for the real researchers , ask them. You are supposed to be a journalist after all.
What did the tobacco industry say 30 years ago?
I have a physics degree and the independent research makes perfect sense.
I have bought Powerwatch's products and managed to shield the radiation out of my Mothers flat.
She has suffered ever since she moved in 1999 from a host of illnesses and been on deaths door 3 times in the last 6 years.
Last year when I became aware of the effects of microwave radiation after doing some research on the subject I bought a radiation monitor and took it to her house and found it full of radiation (below the guidelines as it always is).
All my mother's symptoms fitted with what doctors in Germany are describing.
She has had a blood test in Germany and a hair analysis and radiation damage is confirmed.
You can't say it is psychological since we did not know of these effects until one year ago after she was already very ill. We also didn't know there was a phone mast near her flat as it is on a rooftop and 500m away from her flat so we didn't notice it.
Since we have shielded her flat my mother is improving. She is 79 so conventional wisdom would not expect her to regain her energy!
Last year she was so fatigued that she could only get up 1 day in 7. Now she is out late at night with her friends. Her auto-immune lung disease has stabilised, her immune system is strengthened, her appetite has come back, the pains in her head gone and her sleep returned to normal.
If you stubbenly refuse to repeat in your paper anything but the industry/government view then you can't be surprised if people assume you are an industry spokesman. There are may people out there who know a lot more about the subject than you do. You won't even publish any letters like mine in the paper. I wonder why?
Yours
Sarah
Concerning: Phone mast on every street?
From: SylviaWright
Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:17:51 EDT
To: bad.science@guardian.co.uk
OK - maybe you are just trying to wind up everyone who is concerned about mobile phone masts into a frenzy - I want to tell you IT'S WORKED!!
I won't waste time and effort answering all of your extravagent statements, but suffice to say that one can choose whether to use the phone (low signal or high) - but one cannot choose to lose the mast (or turn it off) - it will be pulsing away 24/7 - just in case anyone wants to make the usual inane mindless calls we hear wherever we go.
I really wish you "science correspondents" would consult people (Powerwatch being one - HPA another) who know the facts and not just play to the gallery.
Regards
Sylvia Wright
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
--------
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin Weatherall
To: bad.science@guardian.co.uk
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2006 7:42 PM
Subject: Cell phone masts do severely harm people.
Ben Goldacre
It would be useful for you to speak to people who are harmed by cell phone masts before you write any more articles on the subject.
In Canada I know of several people who have been severely harmed by the effects of electro magnetic radiation. Their lives have been devastated by what they have been through and how they are still being harmed every day.
I have attached a few documents that may help you to understand the situation better.
If you are going to write stories when you are ignorant of the facts, it is better not to write at all, you are misinforming people who need to know.
Yours sincerely
Martin Weatherall
Ontario,
Canada.
http://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Goldacre
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Goldacre
rudkla - 20. Mai, 15:38
