Tuesday, January 06, 2015

EMR Aware Newsletter Jan. 2015

Inline image 2

From P. Nielson, EMR Aware, Australia

Welcome to our January 2015 Newsletter. Please forward it on to as many interested persons as you wish. Best viewed in Mozilla Thunderbird. If the images don't load in this email, be sure your software is set to "view attachments inline" and as "original HTML" or similar. If any external links do not work, try cutting and pasting the URL directly to your browser. 

To assist with a fair and balanced discussion, our focus is primarily upon the side of the story you may not hear from industry and their sympathetic government regulators. In addition to relaying the latest news from contacts worldwide, our group offers a range of community-oriented services, including educational literature, information events, and a frequently updated DVD containing thousands of research studies documenting the adverse effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, or "EMR". Further details, and our disclaimer, can be found at the bottom of this page. 

Mobile Phones
Telecom Company Patent Admits: Non-Thermal Exposures To Wireless Radiation Is Genotoxic. Causes Clear Damage to Hereditary Material. http://stopsmartmeters.org.uk/major-phone-firm-patent-admits-non-thermal-exposures-to-wireless-radiation-is-genotoxic-causes-clear-damage-to-hereditary-material/

US using fake cellphone towers on planes to gather personal data. There are also roving vans fitted with similar apparatus. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/13/us-usa-security-cellphones-idUSKCN0IX2SQ20141113

Inline image 4
 Inline image 3

What did it feel like to be human before the rise of mobile phones? Before too long, there will be nobody old enough to remember. Above we see two computer generated images of magnetic field intensity gradients. Red is the strongest. Compare the natural signature of the human heart on the left with the one applied to the head by a mobile phone. Try to imagine how differently each would feel. Which would you prefer?

Phone Towers vs. People Power
Close Call at Ocean Shores
Inline image 6

Map showing 200 and 500 metre radius from proposed site at Ocean Shores. The large white building is the public school.

At a public meeting of Byron Shire Council held on 11 December, it was voted unanimously to defer a decision on Telsa's proposal to erect a 30 metre high tower on a Council-owned hilltop. Although posing as permission to lodge a DA, and not an actual DA itself, the document was worded as an "agreement in principle", perhaps obliging Council to accept the tower. It would place dozens of homes, a pre-school and large public school within 500 metres, the latter two seemingly against the Department of Education's guidelines. A civil engineer and real estate agent spoke on the day against the proposal, citing loss of both visual amenity and property value. Health effects are now of additional concern. Council has arranged a meeting of stakeholders to occur on-site 3 February, prior to their next vote on the matter scheduled for the 5th. In the interval, all impacts will be thoroughly reviewed, and unbiased assessments offered to the parties involved.

In response to this unexpected outcome, the attending Telstra spokesperson wheeled out the spectre of a challenge in the Land and Environment Court. It is reported he claimed a prior judgement against Coffs Harbour and Port Stephens ruled against the possibility EMR effects. However, this appears to conflict with the following account in which the issue was simply ignored. The key finding was that the development could not be termed a "commercial" premises because it was essential infrastructure necessary to meet the needs of the local area. My English dictionary suggests otherwise. http://www.dailyexaminer.com.au/news/telstra-given-go-ahead-for-tower-after-three-year-/1422687/

We continue to point out the Common Law implications of conscious avoidance and failure of duty of care. Telstra CEO, David Thodey, has since received one of our free DVD's (see bottom of page). Fortunately, our Council has a strong legal case to refuse in this instance since it owns the land. It should be noted the tower would accommodate the heavily promoted 4G network. Its transmitted signal is stronger and far more complex than 3G, and relatively unstudied in terms of biological effects. Can you imagine a pharmaceutical agent or new food product being released for mass consumption with so little assessment of safety, or warnings of possible side-effects?

Inline image 7

No comments:

Post a Comment