[NBLUG/talk] Cell Tower Upgrades in Sebastopol - Update
waggie at waggie.net
Wed Dec 7 13:56:45 PST 2011
Thanks everyone for the discussion on the topic, it's good discussion to
Even though I disagree with them, I believe wholeheartedly that the
opposing arguments should be given respect and due consideration. As
pointed out, potential health effects are something we do want to
consider in all of this. I believe that the health effects many members
of the public discussed last night that they attribute to EMF radiation
can easily be explained by other (and more plausible, in my not so
humble opinion) causes.
Two of the members of the public, teachers at the charter school
downtown, spoke with elegance and passion about what they believe is the
cell tower causing a high pitched noise that is "rattling inside their
head". They were concerned that the effects would be even stronger on
children, and what it might be doing to them, being (medically speaking)
more vulnerable. My thoughts are that there probably IS something
causing this, but that it's much more likely to be some sort of
mechanical problem with equipment or appliances at the school (perhaps
At the discussion last night at the city council, the health effects on
humans were not part of the actual debate on the topic, though they were
spoken to by a number of the members of the public during the public
comments portion of the meeting. The main issues raised by the
appellant (The EMF Safety Network) seemed to be two things: 1) The
mistakes noted in the application, and 2) the potential effects on the
nearby wetland preserve.
I will also note that I observed many people exhibiting rude behavior at
the council meeting during the time which myself and other supporters of
the upgrade were speaking. The phrase "full of crap" sticks in my mind
in response to a statement by the applicant denying that cumulative
effects from the tower exist. This sort of unprofessional behavior does
not lend credit to the EMF Safety Network's cause.
Anyway, that's my two cents. Thanks again everyone.
On 12/07/2011 12:27 PM, Steve S. wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Jesse Barnes<jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
>> Sorry I missed this... Btw has anyone at a council meeting or
>> otherwise tried to comprehensively debunk the folks worry about EMF and
>> human health?
> Unfortunately, it can't be done. There does not (yet) exist a
> comprehensive, rigorous study demonstrating that there are no worries.
> In part, of course, that comes from the difficulty in proving a
> However, there are occasional studies that indicate the issue deserves
> further attention...
> From a recent IARC 13-nation study, reviewed by WHO:
> " ... some indications of an increased risk of glioma for those who
> reported the highest 10% of cumulative hours of cell phone use ...
> IARC has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly
> carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), a category used when a causal
> association is considered credible, but when chance, bias or
> confounding cannot be ruled out with reasonable confidence."
> ( http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/ )
> WHO goes on to say that they are conducting further studies.
> Of course, this is talking about the risks associated with plastering
> the phone to your ear, not simply the ambient signal from towers...
> No, I'm not saying that we should ban cellphones/towers/etc, or even
> apply draconian restrictions. I'm just saying that the folks who have
> extreme worries have at least SOME evidence, and aren't just nutters
> who can be dismissed out of hand or "debunked" by any
> rational/informed argument.
> - Steve S.
> talk mailing list
> talk at nblug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk