Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Articles About Cell Phone Dangers

Articles About Cell Phone Dangers



|Views: 2,799|Likes:
Published by CellPhoneDanger

More info:

Published by: CellPhoneDanger on Jun 05, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





March 10, 2009 by Mi Kai Lee  Filed under Feature Stories, Health, Technology  7 Comments Humans are not the only ones affected by cell towers. This tree in front of Kaslo's downtown tower is not takingit very well. (Photo: Mi Kai Lee)
A court in France has ordered the dismantling of a cell phone mast based on the ‗precautionary principle‘
because there is insufficient proof that cell phones are harmless. The suit was initiated by residents in thevicinity of the tower against cell phone company Bouygues Telecom. Following the judgements of the NanterreTGI (District Court) and the Versailles Appeal Court Bouygues Telecom began dismantling its phone mast inthe early morning of March 6, 2009.The Columbia Valley can consider itself blessed that fibre is coming to town. High-speed fibre-optic Internetconnections can also be used for voice over IP phone services, such as Skype, and for video conferencing likeWebex. The existence of fibre in the valley will in many cases eliminate the need for wireless Internet and theaccompanying radio-frequency pollution.Residents of the Slocan Valley in West Kootenay are not so fortunate. But local activists fought and won astruggle to keep Telus from installing cell phone towers in the Slocan. They now keep a constant watch on theCBC tower on Red Mountain for any future installation activity by Telus. The Valhalla Wilderness Society was
a major contributor to the Slocan‘s success. Many took up the cause after local politician Colleen McCrory died
of brain cancer, which the community attributed to her cell phone use.On September 24, 2007 the chairperson of the Valhalla Committee for Environmental Health, Richard Caniell,wrote this to Telus:
―At 12:00 noon this date on the CBC radio you were heard once again in
 your tape-
loop assertion that you couldn‘t understand why there was
 any opposition in New Denver to the Telus cell phone transmitterinstallation as cell phone towers were safe and many studies hadshown this. Be advised, this is false, and a knowing deception as youhave been repeatedly shown the existence of adverse scientificreports which you find it advantageous to pooh-pooh.
―Take notice that this letter and the one copied below, the former 
 previously sent to Steve Jenkins, Brock Enderton, Health Canada andothers, sets forth the substantive factors connected to healthhazards and potential fatalities about which you can no longer denyknowledge. Any further claims you make as aforesaid, which have beenrepeated by you through the last weeks after your superiors were puton notice as to the adverse reports, will make you a central figurein ongoing misrepresentation.
―It does not behoove anyone in your position to continue being blind
 and deaf to factors which may seriously impact the public health andespecially that of children. Telus does not escape potentialliability, or the public impact of refusing to implementprecautionary principles, because it relies on Health Canada. Telusis indisputably apprised of the adverse science (as reflected in theletter copied below, sent to Steve Jenkins and others). Yourcontinuance with your deceptive, self-serving statements topromulgate your product in the face of this represents a wantondisregard of the health hazards which may impact persons here; a fact
which may greatly contribute to your company‘s liability and that of 
your own.‖
 In 2007 Germany declared that cell phone usage is hazardous to humans.The BioInitiative Report published in September 2007 by the University of Albany, New York brings togetherextensive findings by medical doctors and research scientists from the US, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, Chinaand the UK.Valhalla highlighted this from the report:
The report states, in connection with wireless devices (cell phones), ―there is enough evidence of increased risk 
of brain tumors to warrant intervention with respect to their use . . . good public health policy requires
 preventative action.‖ An important section in the Report sets forth substantive evidence that transmitter 
radiation is particularly harmful to children and teenagers. The result especially noted by research in othercountries is childhood leukemia.Research published by Professors Mild and Hardell of Orebro University, Sweden, in the journal Occupationaland Environmental Medicine, identified 1,429 people living in central Sweden identified with brain tumours ina 2 and 1/2 year period. Those who live in a rural area and used cell phones had a 56% greater likelihood to
have been diagnosed with a brain tumour over city users. For those using cell phones for 5 years the rural user‘s
risk was four times greater. [from Valhalla]
Professor Mild, who is a biologist at Orebro University, states ―Mobile phones can use up to 1,000 times more power when they are far away from a base station.‖ Those using cell phones in rural areas at a distance from the
r ―absorb far more energy from the handset.‖
Valhalla criticizes Health Canada, who have taken the stand that cell phone radiation is harmless, despite strongevidence of health risks.The Precautionary Principle is increasingly recognized by law courts and governments world-wide. This
safeguard is a moral and political principle which states that ―if an action or policy might cause severe or 
irreversible harm to the public, in the absence of a scientific consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of 
 proof falls on those who would advocate taking the action‖. This principle was adopted by the European Union
and other nations.
The EU version states that ―preventative action should be taken and damage should, as a priority, be rectified at
the source a
nd that the polluter should pay.‖ Telus does not escape responsibility for its actions simply because
they rely on Health Canada, as effective notice of extensive adverse science showing health hazard has beengiven to them directly, and they are the active parties.
More information:
Collected by Eloise Charet 
CVNews related links:

Activity (30)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Awang Firdaus liked this
paulyrichards liked this
chrzzx liked this
MUNGRADA liked this
porkpied liked this
arkuti liked this
jpsjpsjps liked this
spiritual1989 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->