A mass of mobile phone transmitters on the roof of St Andrews’ cinema has been used in Holyrood to highlight the issue of masts on public buildings, writes Cheryl Wood.

New Picture House — believed to host four transmitters — was used as an example by MSP Ted Brocklebank as he quizzed the Scottish Executive on legislation to prevent public buildings being swamped by masts.

Also raising doubts over the long-term health effects of masts, his question to deputy communities minister Johann Lamont came just days after the death of a St Andrews tot from a rare form of cancer.

Rachel Bratt’s parents Raymond and Charlotte believe that a mast close to their former home in Balmullo was partly to blame for her being diagnosed with neuroblastoma.

The four-year-old died on November 2 after battling the illness for more than two years.

Conservative MSP Mr Brocklebank said, “Many people who, like me, live in the centre of St Andrews, are becoming increasingly concerned that masts seem to be proliferating at an alarming pace on the roof of New Picture House in North Street.

“There is still too much unknown about the effects of these masts, and where will it all stop?

“Are we to have school roofs almost entirely covered with masts while our children and grandchildren play underneath?

“The fact is we still cannot be sure about the long-term effects of some communications systems.”

Omega we can be sure about the long-term effects of these communications systems. See under:
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wissenschaft+zu+Mobilfunk/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cancer+Cluster
http://www.buergerwelle.de/body_science.html

Rachel’s parents have conducted research into the effects of transmissions and have vowed to continue even after their daughter’s death.

Mrs Bratt said, “They continue to stick these masts up and ignore what has been said about them.

“Until they are 100 per cent certain they don’t affect people, they shouldn’t put them up.

“I will keep fighting. I don’t want other families to go through what we have.”

In the Scottish Parliament yesterday, Mrs Lamont acknowledged people were concerned about mobile phone masts, but declined to comment on a particular site.

“Depending on the circumstances of a case, there may be a number of pieces of legislation with which such installations would have to comply,” she said.

“It is incumbent on everyone involved to be as transparent as possible about where the masts are going, who is operating them and so on, particularly given the unease about telecommunications masts.

“Current research does not reinforce that unease, but I know from my area that neither the current research nor emphasis of the fact that we are tracking the matter sufficiently reassure people.

“It is important — I know that the industry is committed to this — to work as closely as possible with people and to try, if possible, to site masts where people are comfortable with them.”

© All copyright D C Thomson & Co Ltd., 2005

http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/output/2005/11/11/story7731617t0.shtm

Angry residents are preparing to go to battle with mobile phone giant Vodafone for a second time over a proposed mast.

The world's largest phone company plans to construct a 14m high telegraph pole with antenna in Beehive Hill on the grass verge opposite the junction with Woodcote Avenue.

Protesters fought off a previous application on the corner of Beehive Hill and Birmingham Road in May. But they say another application has been submitted for a mast just 65m away from the original site and 30m from the nearest house.

Dale Potts, Zoe Keep, Owen Hillis, and Paul and Kathy Mooney, who live in Beehive Hill and Woodcote Avenue, claim it would be an eyesore and have launched a campaign urging people to write to Warwick District Council ob-jecting to the plans. They have also taken a petition to Priors Field School, which they say is 400m from the proposed site.

Mr Potts, 35, said: "This mast will have virtually no screening or visual cover to protect the views of residents. This proposed mast will be some 75 per cent higher than existing street lighting and houses in the surrounding area, so will be clearly visible for some distance. It will have a totally overbearing effect on the local community.

"This location is still an 'A' road into Kenilworth with hundreds, if not thousands, of cars using this route daily. Is this really what we want people to see as they enter or leave Kenilworth? We urge residents to let the local planning office have their objections to what would be a complete eyesore on a beautiful part of town."

A spokesman for Vodafone explained that other potential locations had been investigated but this was a preferred site. She added: "Nothing is set in stone. We will take people's views on board."

Representations should be sent to Debbie Prince, senior planning officer, PO Box 2178 Riverside House, Milverton Hill, Leamington Spa CV32 5QH or emailed to: planning_west@warwickdc.gov.uk by November 25.

11 November 2005

All rights reserved © 2005 Johnston Press New Media.

http://www.kenilworthtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=698&ArticleID=1252342

http://www.emr.bc.ca/Articles/TwoCities.html

It is the worst of times for Vancouverites as city council under the advice of their chief medical officer John Blatherwick, has decided in January, 2000 that cellular phone companies would no longer be required to notify the public as to where or when they planned to site cellular phone antennas on public property. Blatherwick’s advice; that cellular phone towers pose no known health risk, is exactly opposite to that of the chief medical officer of Canada’s largest city, Toronto.

After extensive independent research, Dr. Shelia Basrur, and consultant, Ron MacFarlane raised their concerns in a memo of November, 1999 to city council. They recommended to:

1. Practice prudent avoidance - site towers at least 200 meters from schools and day-cares.

2. Reduce radiation emissions by 100 times below current limits.

3. Notify residents of new or changed installations, allowing citizens to be an integral part of the process.

Until now, federal government regulations have allowed cell phone companies to locate antennae any where they want, as long as the company notified residents living within 100 meters of the base of a support structure. By deciding not to tell citizens about where antennae are going to be located council has removed the last vestments of free or fair public process. Vancouver City Council, the victims of slick PR campaign by the cell phone industry and the Radiation Protection Branch, has ruled that no citizen will be told if a multinational communications giant, decides to place an antenna against their back fence, or on top of their child’s daycare centre for that matter.

Some might consider that something so fundamentally and morally wrong would violate every thing that a free and democratic society represents. They may think that this bylaw steals basic civil rights away from them in much the same manner as the regulations promoted by the MAI and the WTO or that such a draconian law violates their rights as laid out in our country’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms - and they might be right. This may put Vancouver city council in the constitutional hot seat they deserve. Unless this type of bylaw is declared unconstitutional any city council could decide to take these fundamental rights away from the very people who elected them.

This can and will happen in other municipalities in Canada, or worldwide. For the most part, the corporate media in Canada has given little serious coverage of this issue, but if you check out other information sources such as the Internet, you will find these same struggles are happening all over the world. In the Victoria area, in 1998 and 1999, a small group of activists helped 5 neighborhoods repel efforts by cell phone companies to erect towers. Because the cell phone company must notify local governments and the citizens near to the proposed tower, activists have found out where the towers were to be located and went directly to the neighborhoods to warn the residents. That is why cell phone companies want to get rid of this requirement.

In our area in Victoria the companies will soon run out of existing structures to attach their antennae, and they will have to apply for permits to build towers again. They are carefully assessing the ideologies of each council member in each local council, and if the political climate is right, the cell companies will approach councils to adopt a bylaw such as that in Vancouver.

In Vancouver, with no public notification of where these structures are proposed, environmental activists will no longer find out where the towers are going and they can no longer warn those most affected of the potential health hazards. With one little bylaw and the cell phone companies have cut off the enviro-warriors vital communication lines and removed the public’s primary source of information about associations between disease and cell phones. Consequently, Vancouverites will remain uninformed about the devastating health effects of EM Radiation and mega-corporations will get to put their antennae anywhere they want.

In another Canadian city, Toronto’s medical health officer, Dr. Sheila V. Basrur is going in exactly the opposite direction to Blatherwick, by declaring that there are negative health effects of EM Radiation occurring at exposure levels far below that which Health Canada’s Radiation Protection Branch, (RPB) claims is safe. This is not surprising given their EM Radiation guidelines, known as Safety Code Six, are only concerned about how much EM Radiation it takes to heat human tissue. What Basrur and the all Canadians are concerned about are disease processes that are triggered by EM Radiation exposures that are thousands of times less than what is required to heat tissue.

If you call the RPB today and express your concerns about EM Radiation exposure, from cell phones or antennae, they will quote Safety Code Six, which lists your exposure level as thousands of times less than what will cause "harm". The problem is, the RPB conveniently neglect to tell you that their definition of harm is when EM Radiation begins to heat your flesh. They also do not mention that diseases like cancer and Alzheimer’s are associated with exposure levels thousands of times lower than what heats tissue. They use guidelines that have nothing to do with the health effects that the public is concerned about, guidelines that allows massive levels of exposure to EM Radiation.

The RPB rests their whole case of public safety, on their wacky definition of harm, and it is a position that can not supported scientifically. If the truth gets out the public could get mighty angry, so the RPB has no choice but to perpetuate the deception. The RPB is really nothing more than a public relations department for the cell phone industry as they collaborate to influence health officials. The plan has worked well so far, but now it appears Basrur has seen through them. Her job will probably be on the line only because she is honest.

Dr. Sheila V. Basrur is recommending guidelines for exposure to microwave radiation as emitted from cellular phones and antennae, 100 times more stringent than those that currently exist. Health Canada’s claim that Safety Code 6 is "one of the most stringent in the world" is simply not true. Switzerland’s emission standard is 90% lower than ours, Italy’s is 85% lower, the province of Salzburg, Austria is 98.5% lower, and six municipalities in Australia have standards 10, 000 lower than our "stringent" standards. Dr. George Carlo headed the industry’s Wireless Technology Research and served as the industry’s spokesperson from 1993 to 1999. This $27 million US research program oversaw over 50 studies in 16 different laboratories. In a letter dated Oct. 9, 1999, to C. Michael Armstrong, CEO of AT&T, Dr. Carlo cautioned the industry against dealing with public health concerns "through politics, creating illusions that more research over the next several years helps consumers today, and false claims that regulatory compliance means safety."

"The current popular backlash we are witnessing in the United States today against the tobacco industry is derived in large part from perceived dishonesty on the part of that industry in not being forthright about health effects. I urge you to help your industry not repeat that mistake."

In October, 1998 scientific experts gathered in Vienna to discuss health effects of RF electromagnetic fields. They unanimously signed an accord stating "The participants agreed that biological effects from low-intensity exposures are scientifically established." Regarding cellular base stations, they said "The public should be given timely participation in the process. This should include information on technical and exposure data as well as information on the status of the health debate. Public participation in the decision [limits, sitings, etc., ] should be enabled."

One of the signatories was Carl Blackman of the US Environmental Protection Agency. Another was Dr. William Leiss, President of the Royal Society of Canada. The E.P.A. has classified electromagnetic radiation as a possible human carcinogen.

Another signature, Dr. Henry Lai of the University of Washington said, "I have come to the conclusion that exposure to RFR from use of mobile phones and possibly from chronic exposure to phone masts and transmission towers has not been proven to be safe. Actually, recent research data in the last few years have added to the concern. To deny any "possible health effects" from RFR emitted from wireless communication devices is scientifically not defensible given the growing evidence of RFR bioeffects."

Let's hope our local councils adopt Toronto’s recommendations and have the wisdom to allow the citizens that they represent basic civil rights, by insisting that the public is informed about any proposed cell phone antenna installation.


Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=292

http://tinyurl.com/a4jv9

Nov 9 2005

Anti mobile phone mast protesters have pulled down a massive communication tower near to a Huntington youth club, following widespread fury at its controversial siting.

The 12-metre Orange mast at the back of Littleton Youth Centre was ripped out of its foundations and dumped on its side by what is believed to be a number of protesters in the village.

It is believed they used bolt-cutters to fell the mast.

Feelings about the contentious tower have been running high in the village since its siting in 2002 - this is the second attack on the mast in a number of months.

Residents in Stafford Road, which runs along the bottom of the youth centre, told The Post they were not surprised by the incident.

"To be perfectly honest, I don't think you'll find anyone in the village who will be shocked by this," one resident, who did not want to be named, said.

"That thing is massive and nobody wanted it here at the time. It's right next to a youth centre and a playing field. How can that be safe?

"Everybody hears horror stories about these things and yet they stick it right next to where children play.

"I don't think you'll find anybody who will be upset about this. In fact we would probably buy them a round of drinks."

South Staffs District Council was inundated with protests when the mast was first erected. Residents' fears were also echoed by Huntington Parish Council who thought the tower was in the wrong place.

Anger over a glut of mobile phone applications in the Chase area has been growing over the last few months.

Many residents feel the area has become a 'dumping ground' for phone companies to erect their masts.

The concern comes at a time when Chase Council planning control committee councillor, Les Bullock, admitted the health guidelines the committee were given on mobile phone masts contained 'no cast-iron guarantee' on their safety.

"Nobody can give us a definitive answer on the safety of these things," mother of two Patricia Fellows said.

"To be truthful I'm glad it has been ripped down."

South Staffs and Huntington Parish Councillor Ron Kenyon said he understood the concerns of residents, but could not condone the actions of protesters-This is the second time they've had a go at it (the mast)," he said.

"It was not made welcome by the residents who really didn't want it here at all.

"Everybody has had enough of these things, but I have to say this is a bit extreme.

"They've tried to undo the bolts at the base it before. People are getting fed up with them and you can understand their frustration. But, obviously, you can't condone this sort of thing at all."

© owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Plc 2005


Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=290

A MOBILE phone company has won the right to put up a phone mast in Bakewell despite officials turning down their application.

The Peak Park Planning Authority refused the application from the Hutchinson 3G Group UK Ltd in May this year. But the phone company appealed against the decision to put up a mast on Butts Road, and won last week.

A resident who did not want to be named, said: "It's a bit of a waste of time having a Peak Park Authority who are supposed to take care of these things when their decision is overturned.

"It will be 20m away from my property. I know they said there is no health issue, but you can't convince people who will live near it.

"It isn't a good thing to have in the centre of Bakewell."

Bakewell Town Councillor Joyce Steel said: "In my personal opinion, I don't think it's a suitable position. It's too close to properties and right in the centre of the town. It's going to be an eyesore."

The application was refused by the Peak Park planning committee on the grounds that it would harm the conservation area and harm residential properties. Twenty one letters of objection were also received.

The company appealed against the decision, and the appeal was allowed by the planning inspector.

The inspector decided the mast would only be seen from a short section of Butts Road, and could not be seen from ground level in the town centre.

The Peak Park required a condition be put on the planning permission that the mast must be painted to blend in with the surroundings, and removed when no longer required.

Narendra Bajaria, chair of the planning committee, said: "Each application is considered on its merits, and in this case the committee felt that the phone-mast would have a detrimental effect on the character of the Conservation Area, the setting of the listed buildings and the amenities of nearby residents.

"The inspector allowed the appeal after careful consideration of those arguments and we have to accept his decision."

A spokesperson from Hutchinson 3G Group UK Ltd, said: "We are pleased with the inspectors decision to allow us this site as we do need a site in the town in order for people to use their phones."

By Amy Thurston

09 November 2005

http://www.matlocktoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=749&ArticleID=1248349

Information ouverte de Next-up organisation à:

Monsieur Xavier BERTRAND, Ministre de la Santé et des Solidarités,

Madame Michèle FROMENT-VEDRINE, Directrice Générale de l’Agence Française de Sécurité Sanitaire de l’Environnement et du Travail (AFFSET),

Professeur Jacques ROLAND, Président de l'Ordre National des Médecins.

L' Agence de Protection Sanitaire d'Angleterre (HPA) Réexamine sa position sur un nouveau phénomène de Santé l' Electro Hyper Sensibilité (EHS)

http://www.next-up.org/main.php?param=electroehs

Lettre ! . . . de l'opérateur Orange France SA.
http://www.next-up.org/main.php?param=dernieresinfos&date_news=2005-11-08

Sorry I have no citations for this.

Scott Munson


Like lead, asbestos, Teflon, plastic, info is being witheld.

Scientists around the world have been trying to expose the dirty secret about microwave radiation, aka cellular.

In Europe where it is ten years ahead of North America, Cell phone manufactures were having their employees suddenly become very ill. Ericson's top engineer became electromagnetically sensitive and could not continue. Many others from that one company also had ems. Apple Computers top guy who did started apple networking from the start also had the same problems. And last month, Oct 2005, a cell phone sales person won a law suit proving that their exposure made them sick - there are plenty more stories of industry workers dying or ill.

So how does this relate to Avian? Well if you go back and see, Mice were used in studies of cell phone radiation in various USA labs and only the reports that were taylored by the cellular industry were released to the media, the others which showed extreme caution due to the fatal results never made it to the main media. A video called "Public Exposure - Wireless Revolution" shows how scientists have been trying to get the truth to general public but the industry owns the studies because they fund the radiation studies and one release what they want.

Chickens in Canada were distroyed in late 2004, some 100,000 birds. The media did not release that all the chicken farms near Vancouver Canada, were indeed beside a Microwave Navy Antenna base. This base has the exact same antennas as the popular HARRP station in Alaska, just less of them. A specialist who knew about both the chicken industry and the antenna station output of Microwave Communications had stepped forward to hand the data to the media about what was happening with these Canadian Chickens, but no, the media would NOT touch it.

The government review board of the Canadian "Out Break" would not touch the data. That is because the data is true, Microwave radiation breaks down the immune systems. If you have a high exposure for a short period of time - or a low exposure for a very long period of time - both applications are deadly to both animals and humans.

So how do south asia chickens get exposed to cell phone towers or cell phone users - are they using that many cell phones there? In fact they do use cell phones, even the poor areas of Africa use cell phones becuase "its easier to set up, no telephone lines". A contact with several residents from asia said there is actually more cell phones in that area then some parts of north america.

Deformed animals in Italy were ignored by the media, deformed cows in other parts of Europe were ignored by the media, especially the ones with large cellular antenna towers on the barn roof in the background.

Omega see under:
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/missgebildete_tiere_volturino.htm

Israel is having a cancer outbreak this year and studies show that those near cell towers have died suddenly. Same thing with Spain and France.

Omega see under: Cancer Cluster
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/663825/

To conclude, avian flu may be a flu like symptom, but it is why it occured, the immune system is broken down, and anything that the body has to fight off cant, because it used all the defenses to reverse the damage of radiaiton, day after day. The immune system eventually can not catch everything and things get through.

http://members.aol.com/gotemf/emf/animals.htm
http://members.aol.com/gotemf/group/
http://members.aol.com/gotemf/emf/flu.htm

Look at the deformation of both animals an humans from Depleted Urainium, - watch "Invisable Wars - Deplete Urainium" Feb 2000

and OPPS!

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/04/13/flu.recall/index.html

Labs scramble to purge virus Samples sent out worldwide traced to 1957 pandemic

Thursday, April 14, 2005 Posted: 12:22 AM EDT (0422 GMT) Authorities are trying to work out how many labs got the samples.

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) Authorities are doing everything possible to ensure samples of a killer influenza virus sent to more than 4,000 laboratories worldwide are destroyed before anyone becomes infected, a top U.S. disease expert says.

"While the risk of the situation is very low, we're not taking any chances and we're doing everything we can to make sure that there is no threat to human health," Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told reporters at a news conference on Wednesday. On September 10, the College of American Pathologists sent samples of the virus that caused the "Asian flu" pandemic of 1957 to laboratories in 18 countries, including the United States and Canada. The pandemic killed more than 1 million people, including about 70,000 in the United States. The samples, part of a package of pathogens sent to laboratories to test their ability to identify them, were last seen in nature in the United States in 1968, Gerberding said. Anyone born since then would presumably have no immunity to the virus, she said. Authorities are still trying to determine how many laboratories got the samples of the virus, called Influenza A H2N2. "We're working with officials in all of these countries to take the steps necessary to contain the problem," she said. Those steps include identifying the panels that contain the virus and destroying those samples by heating them. Routine disease surveillance so far has turned up no unusual patterns that might indicate the disease had spread in the United States, she said.

CDC: Raise safety level

In addition, the CDC recommended that laboratories that have received the virus samples use safety level 3 precautions in handling them. Current recommendations require only that they be handled under less-stringent safety level 2 precautions. The World Health Organization has contacted the ministries of health of the other 17 countries "to be sure that similar processes are in place" in all labs affected. How the virus wound up being included in a package of pathogens sent around the world was not clear, but Gerberding said health authorities would work to ensure such a lapse did not recur. Organizations responsible for testing and accrediting laboratories' quality routinely send out panels of unknown organisms to determine if the laboratory can accurately identify them. In this case, the College of American Pathologists contracted with Meridian Bioscience Inc., of Cincinnati, Ohio, to create the panel, Gerberding said. "It is almost impossible to believe they didn't know they were dealing with an H2N2," she added. "It was probably a situation where the advantages of using a strain that grows well and can be readily manipulated in the lab were the driving force without even considering that ... it could potentially cause a hazard to not only the workers in the laboratory, but to the people in the community." Gerberding said she did not know who made that decision. A company spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking comment. Most of the samples have been destroyed, she said.

Found by Canadian lab

It was not until March 26 that a laboratory in Canada discovered the presence of the virus and alerted Canadian health officials, who in turn notified the World Health Organization and CDC, Gerberding said. Five days later, the lab was advised "to undertake a full stem-to-stern assessment" and, on April 8, the lab determined that the panels were the source, Gerberding said. The threat had gone unnoticed for more than six months because the labs that received the panels would have characterized the virus only as an A or B strain and would not necessarily have characterized it further, she said. The laboratories have been asked to report back to the college when the specimens have been destroyed, a process "that will take some time," Gerberding said. Dr. Jared Schwartz, a spokesman for the College of American Pathologists, which distributed the virus, acknowledged its distribution was a mistake. He said records indicate the vendor knew it was sending a flu virus but apparently did not realize it was the deadly strain. In addition to the United States and Canada, the other countries that got the panels are Bermuda, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and Taiwan. It also went to Hong Kong. Schwartz said his organization will ask the CDC to approve strains sent out for testing in the future, and that samples will be limited to pathogens covered by current vaccines. "This is the first time, thank God, that we have had, in any of our proficiency testing, issues focused on as a potential problem," he said. "It's regrettable, and a lot of communication needs to be improved to be sure that this doesn't happen again. And we're going to be working with the CDC to make sure of that." Laurie Garrett, author of "The Coming Plague: Newly Emerging Diseases in a World out of Balance," said the mistake underscores problems with the U.S. public health safety net. "We've invested billions of dollars into alleged bioterrorism preparedness and to alleged preparedness for avian and pandemic influenza," she said. "This is a sorry indicator of how well the money has been spent." CNN's Miriam Falco contributed to this report.

WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT?

Because people are out there with a very BAD immune system and would catch things very quickly EMF (and DU) are (were) the hidden parts of the invisible puzzel and now you know.

--------

Public Exposure - DNA, Democracy and the "Wireless Revolution"
http://www.mercola.com/forms/public_exposure.htm
http://www.mercola.com/forms/public_exposure_testimonials.htm


Probable connection between EM radiation and H5N1 Avian Virus outbreak http://omega.twoday.net/stories/741183/

Putting The “Coming Pandemic” Into Perspective
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1085983/