How one Shady Side ES parent changed her mind
I thought I was in favor of the tower. Better cell service, money for our school, win-win, right? One thing that did concern me is the cancer risk in children near the tower. That’s pretty important, and I wanted to know for sure. So I did what I always do, research the topic, find out the facts, and make my own decision. So I sent the kids to their grandparents for the weekend, and got to work; 48 hours of research with a sleep break. What I found scared the hell out of me. I’d like to share it with you, so that you can make a truly educated decision. It’s an extremely complicated issue, but here is the short version:
Milestone says the tower poses no health risk to the children and surrounding community. They say the FCC, the American Cancer Society and the World Health Organization have deemed it safe, and that there are no studies to suggest a cancer risk. The tower will be well within FCC standards.
Well, partially true, partially not. All of these statements are true, if this were still 1985. How many towers were up then?
The RF radiation standards were put in place by the FCC in 1985, were never meant to address cell towers as we have today, and the studies done then deal strictly with “thermal” effects. So great, we are in no danger from thermal effects. HOWEVER, much more recently, studies into the “non-thermal” effects have been done. And there is no shortage of those studies. It is a very rapidly expanding research field, and the science being conducted today does NOT point to its safety.
On their website, the American Cancer Society website cites a lot of studies proving RF safety, but states this about its research:
“Very few human studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers and cancer risk.”
The Federal Communications Commission website admits this about non-thermal effects:
"It is generally agreed that further research is needed to determine the generality of such effects and their possible relevance, if any, to human health."
The World Health Organization is currently organizing research into this area for a new determination on RF. Many of their own scientists have recently spoken out claiming that current medical research is proving that RF radiation is dangerous, cancer-causing, and that developing children are more biologically susceptible to this type of radiation.
Doesn’t sound like the agencies, that are supposed to assure us of tower safety, as are very sure themselves. And there is so much more.
MANY high level agencies have recently expressed concerns about the inadequacies of the FCC's current standards on cell tower radiation. The EPA DISAGREES with these standards and NOW classifies it “PROBABLE human carcinogen.” The California Medical Association issued a resolution stating that FCC standards are “INADEQUATE to protect human health” and that “peer reviewed research has demonstrated ADVERSE biological effects.” An article by The International Journal of Cancer Prevention concluded that there was a significantly HIGHER rate of cancer near a cell phone transmitter station. It states “The proportion of newly developing cancer cases is significantly higher among patients that live within 400 meters of a cell phone transmitter when compared with the general population.” Dr. Neil Cherry, PhD Biophysicist in New Zealand, wrote a 120 page review of 188 scientific studies. He said, “The radiation causes cells to change in a way that makes them cancer forming. To claim there is no adverse effect from phone towers flies in the face of a large body of evidence.”
There are thousands of scientists, researchers, and biophysicists worldwide that now believe cell towers are cancer causing, have the research and data to prove it, and are screaming for their governments to stop and reevaluate this issue before the harm that is to come. Based on the latest scientific research, FIFTEEN other countries have recently reduced their RF standards to hundreds of thousands of times lower than the current US FCC standard. We are currently now among the least protected in the world.
I kept digging, and the more I found, the more I felt that I had not originally been given enough information to make an informed decision. Now, armed with more facts, I can’t imagine anyone accepting such a high risk for their children. Besides leukemia and various cancers, studies also show children developing ADHD, memory problems, sleep disturbances, and behavioral problems from being near this type of radiation.
It was enough to make me change my mind. The risk is too high, a huge amount of credible, current scientific research is proving it. I ask simply that you become better educated. Ten years from now, will you wish you had?