<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font size="+1">Thanks everyone for the discussion on the topic,
it's good discussion to hear.<br>
<br>
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. </font><font
size="+1">I believe that the health effects many members of the
public discussed last night that they attribute to EMF radiation
can easily be explained </font><big>by other (and more plausible,
in my not so humble opinion) causes.<br>
<br>
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".</big> <big>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 HVAC
equipment).</big><br>
<font size="+1"><br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
Anyway, that's my two cents. Thanks again everyone.<br>
<br>
- Chris<br>
</font><br>
On 12/07/2011 12:27 PM, Steve S. wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAP9UzSADgxxnRdF5kEZhk5e7iOQ-ohf6-a5dr7naSZmtGp+=iA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Jesse Barnes <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org"><jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
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
negative.
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."
( <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/">http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/</a> )
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
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk@nblug.org">talk@nblug.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk">http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>