Editor, The Times:
Re: “Cell phone service is safe” by Jim Johannson, Telus director, public consultation in Dec. 5 issue
Firstly, Mr Johannson’s faith in the World Health Organization is misguided. Industry funding plays a critical role in scientific research (Google “Who’s funding WHO?” for an illuminating revelation.)
To determine to what extent the source of funding determines results, Dr. Henry Lai (who was one of the first scientists to demonstrate biological effects of cell phone radiation) decided to ‘research the research’ of 326 studies on cell phone radiation. He found that half the studies showed a biological effect and half did not. But when he separated the independently-funded studies from those funded by the wireless industry, he discovered that the former were 70 per cent likely to find an effect, whereas the latter only 30 per cent.
“Even if you accept all the industry studies, you still end up with 50-50,” Lai says. “How could 50 per cent all be garbage? People always start with the statement ‘Hundreds of studies have been done on this topic, and no effect has been found,’ but this is a very misleading statement. [The statements] come out from the cell phone industry. This really worries me, because people come out and say things without the facts.”
Don’t put your hopes on Health Canada, either. It waited for many years of confirmed statistics of cancer and death before the safety level of Radon was lowered from 800 to 200 Bq/m3 – a level that is still far weaker than the existing guideline in U.S.
The Telus director argues, “The radio frequency signals from cell phones and cell towers are very similar to those in use for many decades in televisions, radios, and other household devices.” Ah, but these are not transmitting devices.
Mr. Johannson states, “… the strength of the EMF created by a refrigerator is comparable to [that] of nearby cell towers.” Google “How Far is Safe?” (Taraka Serrano) to read about the cancer studies that put the lie to the Telus director’s complacency (further good references are at the bottom of Serrano’s article.)
We seem to have an ever-growing need for wireless transmission, to the detriment of our health. There are at least two dozen epidemiological studies on humans indicating a link between EMFs and serious health problems. In March 1990 the Environmental Protection Agency issued a draft report recommending that EMFs be classified as a Class B carcinogen: a “probable” human carcinogen. As a result of pressure from utility, military and computer lobbyists, the EPA’s final revision classed EMFs as a “possible” carcinogen.
Lastly, Mr. Johannson importantly states that it is local demand for the service. Maybe. But could it also be something to do with the needs of the “smart” grid?
Upper Clearwater, B.C.