Monday, January 31, 2011

Video of the mobile phone mast meeting

Link to coverage on Thornton Heath Live

It's easy to assume that a stand alone mobile phone mast, or single third generation mobile phone, or even a wi-fi system at school is risk-free with regard to human health. However, what about the total exposure? What about cumulative long term exposure of all these different sources of non-ionising manmade electromagnetic radiation? Can it be confidently said there is no risk, especially to children whose bodies are still developing?

James Stevenson from o2, who appears on the video, said at the meeting that the signal coverage, for a mast, is just 1km. Given that mobile phone masts under 15m are erected using a General Permitted Development Order - not full planning application, will we see loads more springing up across Croydon, London and the country?

There are 22.6 billion* reasons why the government might find itself in a difficult position if there was a clear and definitive correlation between proximity to masts and human health.

*£22.6billion is how much the the mobile phone operators paid for the 3G licenses.

Tags ,


Mike Armstrong said...

If the mast is covering out to 1km, then so is the mobile phone which you are holding against your head....

I'm sorry, but the physics of this means that, on the whole, having a mast in your area means that you get less exposure when you are using your phone.

Shasha Khan said...

If that were the case (and logic dictates that you may be correct), why won't the operators agree to epidemiological surveys with local residents?

Standing up for what matters