- INTRODUCTION
-
- With respect to my fellow scientists I shall be writing
this report in non-scientific speak for all of those readers who have not
had the benefit of a scientific education.
-
-
- WHAT IS ALL THIS REALLY ABOUT?
-
- Imagine the field around a magnet and imagine ordinary
everyday static electricity. If you put the force field from the magnet
with the force field from the static electricity you make a wave. This
wave is called an electromagnetic wave. There are lots of different types
of electromagnetic waves but they are all made of the same two things -
magnetic and static. The only difference between the waves is their wavelength
or the length of the wave and the number of waves that can be produced
a second, i.e. the frequency. All of these waves are put into a table called
the electromagnetic spectrum.
-
- At one end of this electromagnetic spectrum you have
the very short waves, namely gamma rays and x-rays and at the other end
of the spectrum you have the very long ways, namely radio, TV and waves
from overhead power cables. All of these waves have the same properties;
that is to say they all behave the same. They can all be reflected, refracted,
and they all travel at the same speed, which is the speed of light. For
interest, if you were one wave of light you would be able to travel around
the world nearly seven times every second; that is the speed of light.
The electromagnetic spectrum is ordered so that at the short wave end you
have the gamma rays, x-rays, ultra-violet, visible light, infra red, microwaves,
radar, TV and radio in that order. The ultra-violet and above are known
as ionising waves and there is no argument as to the damage they can cause
when entering the body. Below ultraviolet is said to be non-ionising and
this is where arguments occur between scientists as to whether damage can
occur inside the human body through exposure to these waves. The microwaves
used in the TETRA system are in the non-ionising section of the electromagnetic
spectrum and I will be discussing the arguments concerning microwaves and
health in this report.
-
-
- SAFETY LEVELS
-
- In this country, when somebody asks about whether a certain
level of electromagnetic radiation is safe they are usually quoted a safety
limit. This safety limit is laid down by the NRPB (National Radiological
Protection Board). Usually when you ask about a dose of radiation you find
that the amount that you were asking about is thousands of times below
the safety limit and thereby reportedly safe. A safety limit is really
a personal opinion. This personal opinion may be based on many factors
by an individual or individuals from whatever data they have in their possession.
To give you an example of some safety limits around the world, for one
particular type of microwave transmitter, these read as follows:
-
- Toronto Health Board: 6 units
-
- Italy: 10 units
-
- Russia: 10 units
-
- Poland: 100 units
-
- US Research Base: 100 units
-
- International Commission: 450 units
-
- The NRPB for Britain: 3,300 units
-
- There are other values for other transmitters but there
is no need to list those in this document.
-
- To look at this another way, supposing you took your
car to a garage and one mechanic estimated a price of £6 and another
mechanic estimated a price of £3,300 for the same job, you would
feel justified about questioning the decisions. The reason that our safety
limit is much higher than the rest of the world is that in other countries
they base their safety limits on possible effects from the electric field,
the magnetic field and the heat produced in the body. Our NRPB will only
base the safety limit for this country on the heat produced in the body.
I will comment on heat further in this report (Appendix 1, Reference 1).
-
-
- WHAT IS BELIEVED TO HAPPEN AS THESE WAVES ENTER OUR BODIES?
-
- I will try to summarise the thousand or so research papers
written over the last 20 or so years and explain or summarise what happens
when the electric and magnetic part of the wave goes into our bodies.
-
- We being water based animals act like aerials to these
waves. As the waves go into our bodies an electric current is generated
inside our bodies which is how aerials work; waves come in and electricity
is generated. The electricity generated in our bodies like all electric
currents goes to ground through our bodies and like all electric currents
it takes the path of least resistance. Unfortunately the path of least
resistance through our bodies, although only representing 10% of our pathways,
carries 90% of our traffic rather like the M1 motorway. The traffic in
our bodies, namely hormones, antibodies, neurotransmitters know where they
are going because they also carry an electric charge. The hormones, antibodies
and neurotransmitters know where to "get off" because there is
a corresponding opposite charge at the site of delivery rather like the
positive and negative ends of a battery. The problem is if you have an
electric current passing through the body it can change this charge, either
on the hormones, antibodies or neurotransmitters or the site of delivery.
-
- An analogy to that would be - if you were in Paris on
the Underground system and you could not speak a word of French, but you
had a map with the station name of where to get off and somebody tippexed
out one or two of the letters, you may get off or you may not, and this
can happen in the body. The hormones, antibodies or neurotransmitters may
get off where they are meant to get off or they may carry on and miss their
target. As a one-off this probably would not be very important but continuous
interference over many years it is argued can lead to many illnesses.
-
- A similar effect is that the destination for some of
these hormones, neurotransmitters, antibodies is a surface of a cell where
chemicals will pass through a membrane into a cell. If you think of a cell
in our body, be it a brain cell, bone cell etc, as having a positive and
negative charge on the outside and the inside similar to a battery the
difference in these charges will draw the chemical into the cell or draw
poisonous substances out of the cell. If the charge is changed on the outside
of the cell, then necessary chemicals may not go in or poisonous chemicals
may not go out. An analogy to that would be - think of your house as a
cell in your body. Essential things like food, water and fuel come into
the house and poisonous things like waste and gases leave the house. In
fact a house is very similar in many ways to a cell in our body. Now, if
we had a blockage and waste could not leave the house or sometimes food
or electricity did not come into the house, over a short period of time
we would survive this, but continual disruption over many years will probably
have a knock-on effect on the health of the inhabitants particularly if
they are young or frail. This is my explanation of how electromagnetic
waves affect our cells.
-
- A final description is possibly the accumulative effect
of all the particles going through the body each second. Each particle
and for TETRA we are talking about 400,000,000 particles a second carries
a small amount of momentum with it. As an analogy, imagine you are driving
down the M1 in the largest lorry you could possibly imagine and you are
hit by the smallest dust particle you could ever imagine. Obviously the
dust particle will not effect the speed or momentum of your lorry but if
you have 400,000,000 dust particles a second for many years they could
if something else was going wrong with your lorry exacerbate the effect
and slow your lorry, and that is the crucial point. All of these effects
I have described are believed to have one final conclusion. They all in
their own way suppress the immune system. When you suppress the immune
system as I will show in research papers, you tend to have more colds,
more coughs, longer colds, longer coughs, longer illnesses, depression,
anxiety leading to suicide or taken to its ultimate - leukaemia.
-
- I will summarise just four of what I consider to be extremely
well written research papers by arguably the worlds leading scientists
in this field. There are other leading scientists of course but I cannot
list them all in this report. I am using these as specimen papers.
-
- When I refer to research papers I am not referring to
something that somebody has sat down one Sunday afternoon and just written.
These research papers have sometimes hundreds of references in the back
and each reference on its own is usually 5-10 years work by a group of
scientists where their work would have been peer reviewed, and in a lot
of cases published. So for arguments sake, if a paper has say 100 references
in the back that could well constitute 500-1,000 years accumulative work.
-
- The first paper (Appendix 2, Reference 2) by Dr Neil
Cherry was presented in May 2000 to the New Zealand Parliament, to Italy,
Austria, Ireland and the European Parliament in Brussels. This paper has
122 references. I have photocopied the references to show that as well
as being peer reviewed, many are published. I will do this with the other
three papers (Appendix 3).
-
- From this research paper some illnesses caused by
- long-term low level electromagnetic radiation are:
-
- Heart problems;
-
- Blood problems;
-
- Interference with bone marrow;
-
- Tumours;
-
- Calcium interference;
-
- 46% reduction in night-time melatonin;
-
- It is believed that during the daytime light going through
our eyes passes a message to the pineal glands in the brain which slows
down the production of melatonin. At night when no light goes through our
eyes the production of melatonin is speeded up. Melatonin is believed to
scavenge cancer cells and impurities in our bodies and boost the immune
system. If an officer is sleeping in quarters within range of the TETRA
transmitter, the microwave radiation is believed to act on the pineal gland
and suppress the night-time melatonin to daytime levels; hence the good
work of the melatonin at night will be restricted leading to suppression
of the immune system.
-
- Increased arthritis
- Skin problems
- Ear problems
- Risk to leukaemia
- Childhood cancer
- Sleep problems
- Depression
- Memory loss
- Difficulty in concentrating
- Mental conditions
-
- A very recent discovery shows that microwave radiation
changes the permeability of the blood brain barrier. Our brain has its
own immune system as does our body. The blood brain barrier keeps everything
that is designed to be kept within the brain inside it and protects the
brain from any unwanted diseases or chemicals which could harm it. Similarly
it allows out of the brain anything dangerous to the brain. The blood brain
barrier is rather like a sieve where only particles of a certain size may
go through. Professor Salford at Lund University in Sweden has shown that
such pulsing as from mobile phones can alter the permeability of the blood
brain barrier (Appendix 4, Reference 3). I will argue as TETRA pulses,
which is arguably more powerful than the average mobile phone, this situation
could be worse with TETRA.
-
- Also, it is shown that the electromagnetic radiation
going into the body can change the size of the particles moving around
the body (Reference 4). This is rather like an ice skater spinning on her
skates. With her arms out she spins slowly, but if she pulls her arms in
she spins faster. Microwaves can affect the particles in our body by changing
their spin; hence their size. They can be made smaller or larger. With
the changing of the permeability of the blood brain barrier and the changing
in size of particles unwanted particles may enter the brain or necessary
particles may leave the brain. The connection here with mental conditions
is that Dr Hyland of Warwick University has written that the uptake of
drugs; in particular neurological drugs is inhibited because of changes
in the blood brain barrier.
-
- Neurological illnesses
- Headaches
- Dizzyness
- Fatigue
- Miscarriage, and
- Infertility
-
- I have listed all of the references on this particular
research paper because all of these researches correspond to the above
list.
-
- The second paper I would like to comment on (Appendix
5, Reference 5) has 80 references and as well as a lot of the illnesses
written in Dr Cherry's paper goes on to mention that with regard to mobile
phone handsets you should avoid keeping the handset when switched on adjacent
to the body, in particular in the vicinity of the waist or heart. There
have been deaths due to colon cancer from the Royal Ulster Constabulary
who wore radio or microwave transmitters in the small of their backs for
extended periods of time. Dr Hyland recommends keeping the duration of
calls to an absolute minimum and on his back page relating to pulse mobile
phone radiation on alive humans and animals, the following may occur:
-
- Epileptic activity
- Effects on human EEG
- Effects on blood pressure
- Depression of immune systems
- Increased permeability of the blood brain barrier
- Effects on brain electro-chemistry
- DNA damage in rodent brain
- Cancers in mice, and
- Synergistic effects with certain drugs
-
- Dr Hyland, in my opinion, is one of the world's leading
authorities in this area and his advice is not to be dismissed lightly.
Similarly, another very highly respected scientist is Dr Coghill. I would
add that both Dr Hyland and Dr Coghill are members of the Stewart Committee.
-
- Dr Coghill's paper which has 218 references (Appendix
6, Reference 6) agrees largely with the work by Dr Hyland and Dr Cherry.
In this paper, Section 1.16, Dr Coghill writes "the ultimate question
must be whether chronic exposure to say
- 1 V/m electric fields at the envisaged frequencies is
likely to produce adverse health effects in the long term. At present the
NRPB guidelines recommend an investigation level of 192 V/m while ICNIRP
now offers much lower levels. However these are based on thermal effects:
if non thermal evidence is accepted than 1 V/m is demonstrably able to
induce biological effects, some of which may be adverse".
- I will show in a later paper that TETRA delivers a lot
more than the 1 V/m recommended as a maximum by Dr Coghill.
-
- Dr Coghill also, in his summary in the back, lists symptoms
caused by mobile phone use. Again, I will argue that as TETRA is pulsed
and pulsed radiation is arguably more aggressive than the continuous analogue
wave and TETRA uses more power than the ordinary mobile the symptoms will
be enhanced rather than be reduced for TETRA. The symptoms listed by Dr
Coghill are:
-
- Fatigue
- Headache
- Warmth behind the ear
- Warmth on the ear, and
- Burning skin
-
- My final paper by a very highly respected New Zealand
doctor, Dr Eklund (Appendix 7, Reference 7) which has 37 references shows
leukaemia clusters in and around ordinary radio and TV transmitters around
the world. She says on page 13 that adult leukaemia within 2 kilometres
of a transmitter is 83% above expected and significantly declines within
increasing distance from the transmitter. Similarly skin and bladder cancers
follow a similar pattern. As a scientist I could argue that if leukaemia's'
and cancers are known to exist from ordinary radio and TV transmitters
which take many years to form and radio and TV waves are at the long end
of the electromagnetic spectrum, and it is known that exposure to gamma
rays or x-rays can cause death within a matter of weeks, a hypothetical
line could be drawn from the long waves to the short waves to determine
the length of time or exposure doses needed to cause such illnesses. Fitting
into this pattern would be several years exposure to sunlight causing skin
cancer. There are obvious anomalies with this; namely personal health,
hygiene and all sorts of other factors, but as a crude estimate I would
argue that the further up the electromagnetic spectrum you go, the shorter
the time for the serious illnesses to occur. The microwaves used by TETRA
are above radio and television waves. Being water-based animals we are
particularly sensitive to microwaves; this is why microwave ovens work.
Microwave ovens resonate the water molecules in food and when molecules
resonate they re-emit the energy they absorb as heat. This is why the food
warms up and the plate does not, because it does not contain water.
-
- The warmth on and behind the ear felt by users of mobile
phones is one type of heat. Another type of heat unknown to the user, therefore
not reported are hotspots within the body from microwaves. These hotspots
are tiny areas in the body which warm up considerably when exposed to microwave
radiation. The problem with warming up areas inside the body is that a
very recent research paper has shown that heat shock proteins are produced
to protect the cells in the body from damage. Heat shock proteins act rather
like scaffolding around a building; they go around the cell and protect
the DNA from damage from the heat. Heat shock proteins have been known
to work when the temperature rises by just 2 degrees. Now the problem with
heat shock proteins is as well as protecting the good cells they can also
protect and save from destruction cancer cells. So, if you have a cell
in your body which is turning cancerous and would normally be destroyed
by the body's immune system, the heat shock proteins will protect it and
it will continue to grow. This work was carried out by Dr David de Pomerai,
of Nottingham University (Appendix 8, Reference 8).
-
- A report on mobile telephones and their transmitters
by the French Health General Directorate, dated January 2001, states in
its conclusion of the group of experts that "a variety of biological
effects occur at energy levels that do not cause any rise in local temperature".
The group ask "is it possible to state that there are no health risks?"
and they reply "No". They go on to say "minimise the use
of mobile telephones when reception is poor, use an earpiece kit and avoid
carrying mobile phones close to potentially sensitive tissue, i.e. a pregnant
woman's abdomen or adolescent gonads". They recommend hospitals, day-care
centres and schools should not be directly in the path of the transmission
beam. Also and very important, they say "the cumulative exposure over
their lifetime will be higher ". The word cumulative is also mentioned
by Professor Sosskind and Dr Prausnitz in their paper (Reference 9) where
they say "an accumulated cellular level damage mechanism is not necessarily
related to the intensity but can relate to total dose Hence the averaging
of weekly exposure is a meaningful adverse effect related level".
-
- This accumulative factor puts a very different slant
on doses of microwave radiation. In particular an accumulative level of
radiation can build up very quickly when you receive 400,000,000 waves
every single second. This is why scientists are concerned and warnings
have been issued for people with pacemakers, hearing aids, insulin pumps
in relation to interference of their apparatus from electromagnetic waves.
Warnings are also given to persons with metal implants in their bodies.
These implants can a) warm up; and b) absorb the microwave radiation and
re-emit it at a different wavelength. I have been around the world talking
to scientists and we agree, although it cannot be proved, that the recent
incidents in breast cancers in ladies could be due to the metal underwiring
in bras absorbing microwave radiation and re-emitting it at a different
wavelength into the mammary glands of the breast. The mammary glands are
known to be particularly sensitive to radiation and they are known to be
easily changed into cancer cells.
-
- Following this line of thought, I would argue scientifically
that using a TETRA handset, remembering that if you are using a TETRA handset
you must also be receiving radiation from the main transmitter, i.e. you
do not just have the radiation from the phone you would have the radiation
from the transmitter as well, or the phone would not work, could enhance
breast cancer in the lady police officers. A similar argument follows with
the argument that the eyes receive 29% extra radiation because of their
moist make-up. Metal-rimmed spectacles will absorb the microwave radiation
and re-emit it onto the surface of the eye. Again, unproven, but I can
follow the arguments that support the two recent research papers which
have found increases in eye cancers in two separate areas of the eye. One
cancer has been found in the side of the eye, one cancer has been found
in the front of the eye (Appendix 9, Reference 10) (Appendix 10, Reference
11).
-
- As a result of using pulsed mobile phones, again I will
argue that as TETRA is more powerful than the average mobile there could
be long-term damage to the eyes of the officers using TETRA.
-
- A union document (Reference 12) printed 4 December 1979
for microwave transmitters up to 100,000 MHz warns its members of the following
illnesses which may occur from accumulative exposure:
-
- Menstrual problems
- Miscarriage, and
- Problems of the eye, heart, central nervous system, reproductive
organs.
-
- They say "a false sense of safety may exist and
non-thermal effects are much lower than have been recognised". The
TETRA system of 380-400 MHz is within this range of this union paper. I
emphasise that these effects are not new; they were being reported on as
far back as 1979 and further on in this paper I will show documents that
relate to exposure effects going way back to the early 1960s. A very important
sentence in this research paper states "non-ionising radiation increases
molecular vibration and rotational energies". I will refer to this
further on in this document.
-
-
- INSURANCE
-
- Two of the worlds largest insurance companies, Lloyds
and Swiss Re, have recommended to other insurance companies on the advice
of Dr Theodore Litivitz, Professor Emeritus of Physics at the Catholic
University of America, to write in exclusion clauses against paying compensation
for illnesses caused by continuous long-term low level radiation. My concern
for the police force, although adequately insured, is that if in future
years officers start claiming for spine or brain tumours the insurance
company will terminate its contract with the police force and leave it
uninsured.
-
-
- SURVEYS
-
- Two recent surveys printed in Electromagnetic Hazard
& Therapy 1998, Volume 9 and 2000, Volume 11; the first of a study
of 11,000 mobile phone users, the second a study of 17,000 mobile users
showed the symptoms already mentioned of fatigue, headache, warmth behind
the ear, warmth on the ear and burning skin in various degrees, depending
on the use and type of person. From the 17,000 persons studied, these symptoms
varied from 31% to 78% of the users. If I take the lowest number of 31%
as a purely hypothetical exercise which is easily dismissed as rubbish,
but does give us a look at some of the numbers that could be involved;
if we take 100,000 police officers then 31,000 of these officers could
experience one symptom. Playing the numbers game, if these 31,000 that
experienced one symptom were to progress to a more complicated level, let's
argue 10% of them may develop a migraine or a headache or require one day's
sick we would have 3,100 officers taking a day's sick. If 10% of those
developed something more serious that required further sickness we would
have 310 officers off sick. If we take 10% of those and suggest that something
more serious may occur then we could be looking at 31 officers, or I would
argue 31 families, per hundred thousand involved in something which may
develop into a serious medical condition. I stress that this is hypothetical
because it is very difficult to predict the future for a device that has
not been tested and there are no long-term studies available.
-
- As an aside it was noted last year that the Public &
Commercial Services Union recommended to its 266,000 Civil Service members
that they should not be forced to carry mobile phones.
-
-
- GROUND CURRENTS
-
- A very little understood phenomena and reported by Dr
D Dahlberg (Reference 13) is ground currents from living in the proximity
of transmitters on animals. I mention this with a view to the police dogs
and the police horses in their kennels or stables at a constabulary base
which is bound to have a transmitter. All transmitters pass an electric
current to the ground beneath them. If the ground is particularly wet this
has an adverse static effect on the animals concerned and in farm animals
can effect milk productions or food production. Huge static charges are
built up in the animals and everytime they come across a metal object the
charge is discharged through the head; the nose being wet. It has been
shown that if animals are taken away from this environment they recover
very quickly, yet in the environment of ground currents they also become
very sick very quickly. I am particularly concerned for the acutely sensitive
brains and organs of the highly trained police dogs.
-
- Three years ago when a lot of research papers individually
were being dismissed I decided to look at several of the main papers and
show that there was a knock-on effect in the body. I drew two flow diagrams
showing the knock-on effects from approximately 25 research papers to show
that even if one symptom is dismissed there can be an accumulative effect
throughout the body. The two flow charts - Appendix 11 relates to the body
and Appendix 12 relates to the brain, show clearly that our body systems
are very closely interlinked.
-
- Taking TETRA's lowest operating power level of 2W I wrote
a hypothetical equation, and being hypothetical it is very easily dismissed,
which shows that at the 2W cell activity may be accelerated by a factor
of 6 or slows down by a factor of 7.5.
-
- There are experimental papers which do in fact show that
mobile phones may speed up thought processes or may slow down cellular
activity. I have tried to explain this using theoretical physics. I based
my paper on the already previously mentioned accumulative doses and increased
molecular vibration (please see previous references). I am fully prepared
to be told that I am wrong or mistaken but I believe I can explain the
process by which energy once inside the body affects the cell potential
(charge on the outside of the cell), the signal transduction (movement
from the outside to the inside of the cell) and the cell cycle timing (the
process by which our cells operate). I have placed this calculation in
Appendix 13.
-
- Often overlooked are the electromagnetic waves from the
cables and transformers of all electrical transmitters. These are usually
in cabinets near the transmitters, hence near offices or sleeping quarters
on constabulary bases or near kennels or stables. A research paper published
in the Journal of Biological Chemistry in 1998 (Reference 14) describes
the 50 cycles a second waves emitted by transformers and power cables,
and how they may induce leukaemia. Although the NRPB and the National Grid
have denied that these waves are dangerous both this paper and an article
in the New Scientist dated 10 March 2001, page 7 which reads "Guilty
as Charged. Powerful fields from pylons and cables are linked to childhood
cancer", demonstrates to me scientifically that these transformers
and power cables should not be overlooked.
-
-
- THE CONCLUSIVE PROOF ARGUMENT
-
- The Government's scientists will often ask for conclusive
proof when they are challenged. It is a word often used when you wish to
win your side of the argument. Scientifically conclusive proof is impossible
to obtain - let me explain.
-
- I was at a legal hearing in Torquay representing a community
and the barrister representing the communications industry said "there
is no conclusive proof that these microwaves will cause damage". I
argued: if somebody stood up and shot me in this courtroom there would
be three levels of proof. You would have everybody as a witness and that
would be accepted in a Court of Law. A pathologist could perform a post
mortem, decide that the bullet killed me and that would be a second level
of proof. If, however you wanted conclusive proof that the bullet killed
me, you would have to argue that at the split second the bullet went into
my body every system in my body was working perfectly because there are
thousands of reasons why I could drop dead on the spot before the bullet
went in and you would have to prove conclusively that all of these systems
were working perfectly before the bullet went in. Clearly, this is scientifically
impossible; there is no such thing as conclusive proof, yet it is what
is demanded by government scientists when challenging their decisions.
-
- Conclusive proof has been demanded by scientists defending
their decisions after they have said the following are safe:
-
- Thalidomide
- Asbestos
- BSE
- Smoking
- Sheep dip
- Gulf War Syndrome
- GM Foods and
- Vitamin B6
-
- With the above list it will be recognised that evidence
of damage from these comes only from counting the people who are injured.
I am arguing scientifically that there is a blanket denial by some scientists
and the only way to show them wrong is to present them with a certain number
of bodies. When commercial interests are at stake there seems to be a denial
of relevant scientific data. The problem with the microwave communications
industry is that they do not have to prove it is safe; you have to prove
it is not, and that is an entirely different ball game. As a scientist,
if I develop a new pill I have to run a 5 or 10 year clinical trial and
convince a Board of my peers that it is safe before I have permission to
release the pill onto the market. With the telecommunications industry
the tables are completely turned around. They do not have to show these
instruments are safe; you have to show they are not.
-
-
- UNDERSTANDING RADIATION (MICROWAVE AS IN TETRA)
-
- There are unknown phenomena concerning low level radiation
that is not generally understood by the users of communication instruments.
Following the Chernobyl incident it was found that long-term continuous
low level radiation of all types was as dangerous as high level doses of
radiation. With high level doses of radiation the anti-oxidants in the
body (Vitamins A, C, E etc) rush to defend and repair the area of the body
being damaged. However with low level radiation the anti-oxidants are not
activated and because the dose is accumulative the problems can build up
and are usually present before the body realises that there is trouble.
So, low level does not necessarily mean safer. Also the smaller you are
the more you tend to absorb. Wavelengths for TETRA and mobile phones are
relatively short and the nearer the part of the body or the infant to the
wavelength the more similarity they have to an aerial and the more they
absorb. With ordinary mobiles the wavelength is around the size of a foetus
and with TETRA you are looking at a 3-6 year old child. I mention this
because TETRA may be used in areas where children are running around and
there are very well known and documented cases of pulse radiation affecting
epileptic children.
-
- Pulse radiation from TETRA at 17.6 Hz (waves per second)
is known to interfere with our natural brains rhythm. Our brains generate
their own waves within our head. One of these waves, called beta waves
is on a very similar frequency to the TETRA handsets. What happens is:
If you could imagine yourself jumping on a trampoline and somebody larger
and heavier jumps on and dances at a slightly different speed you will
bounce at their pace rather than yours. When they jump off you will still
bounce at their speed. The jumping on of the person onto the trampoline
is known as entrainment and this occurs when the TETRA is used in close
proximity to an officer's brain. Because TETRA affects the beta rhythm
of the brain it will affect what the beta rhythm is responsible for; namely
sounds judgement in emergency situations. Entrainment is always followed
by a phenomena called long-term potentiation. This is an analogous to the
person getting off the trampoline leaving you dancing. Long-term potentiation
has been known to last several weeks after the initial source has died
down. The implications for this are that the officers' brain waves would
continue to suffer entrainment even after the sets have been switched off,
which would be reinforced everytime the sets are switched on again.
-
- The first paper written on this subject was by a scientist
called Ptolomy who was a Greek living in Egypt in 64BC. Ptolomy found that
when he spun a wheel with holes in up against the sun at different rotational
speeds he could induce different effects on the brains of his subjects.
To get an idea of the complexity of the brain, if you imagine every single
person in every single city in the world picking up their telephone and
dialling everybody in their phonebooks, that is roughly how many connections
we have in the brain. I will show later that even the Stewart Committee
advised against using any communication instruments that pulsed above 16
waves per second. TETRA is of course 17.6 waves per second.
-
-
- MY SCIENTIFIC CONCERNS ABOUT THE NRPB
-
- From a court case towards the end of 1998 Dr McKinlay
was questioned in court about the use of mobile phones. Dr McKinlay is
a senior scientist in the NRPB. It is known that roughly half of the NRPB's
funding comes from the industries it represents, the other half of its
funding comes from the Government. In court Dr McKinlay explained that
data on tissue conductivity was supplied to the NRPB by Dr Camelia Gabriel
of Microwave Consultants Limited. It transpired that virtually none of
the NRPB documents on non-ionising radiation are peer reviewed and that
Dr McKinlay himself had not authored any experimental studies. Dr McKinlay
admitted he had no biological expertise. Dr Camelia Gabriel is Director
of Microwave Consultants Limited and she reports to the Home Office and
the Health & Safety Executive. She is also Chairman of the European
Standardisation Body.
-
- To summarise, the NRPB subcontract research on microwave
radiation to Microwave Consultants Limited; namely Dr Camelia Gabriel.
Dr Camelia Gabriel is also a senior consultant for Orange plc and has authored
jointly with others the Orange Base Stations Health & Safety Manual
(please see Appendices 14 and 15). Dr Gabriel's son, also of Microwave
Consultants Limited, confirms the safety of transmitters for Orange plc
in school playgrounds (Appendix 16). This dual interest between Dr Camelia
Gabriel as representing the NRPB and Orange plc was picked up and reported
on, on 19 April 1999, by The Observer where Sarah Ryle writes "concerns
are increasing about industry's involvement in research. Some of the NRPB's
conclusions have been based on research by Dr Camelia Gabriel, a technical
advisor to network operator Orange and Head of Private Consultancy, Microwave
(Appendix 17).
-
- The problem as I see it is that when it comes to asking
about safety concerning TETRA or any other communication instrument there
is not one single independent person to give an answer. Every single person
who has a word to say about the safety of police officers is somehow in
the "food chain" going back to the communications industry. The
communications industry fund the NRPB and the Government who fund Microwave
Consultants Limited so every single person has a financial interest in
recommending the product.
-
- THE ABSOLUTE PARADOX
-
- Since the early 1960s this country, America and Russia
have had what is called the non-lethal weapons programme or synthetic telepathy
programme. It is very well documented now that in the early 1960s in Moscow
the Russians beamed continuous low level radiation (microwaves) down onto
the American Embassy causing miscarriages, leukaemia's and other illnesses
to the Embassy staff. Since then the non-lethal weapons programme has become
very sophisticated indeed. It is used a) as a long-term low level radiation
weapon to cause populations illness and b) at higher intensities to cause
blindness, heart attacks or confusion. Details of all of the intensities
are unknown to me but knowing that microwave radiation is accumulative,
any effect can only be a matter of time. In quoting this research I refer
to documents listed under Reference 15. So sophisticated is this research,
and I refer to Operation Pandora Joint CIA/MI6 Operation since the 1960s,
Operation Woodpecker USSR 1976, Operation HAARP still running in USA; they
are able to define specific pulse frequencies to cause specific brain malfunctions
or illnesses. For instance:
-
- Frequency Illness Caused
-
- 4.5 Paranoia
-
- 6.6 Depression/Suicide
-
- 11 Manic behaviour/Anger
-
- 25 Blindness if aimed at the head/Heart attack if aimed
at the chest
-
- Other consequences of frequencies used but not listed
here are hysteria, trauma, lust, murder and cancer, and may all be induced.
-
- The TETRA frequency is 17.6 Hz (waves per second) so
as a scientist looking at this data which is well publicised I ask myself,
if the illnesses moving up the frequency range are progressive and TETRA
is between the frequency of 11 and 25 on this table, what will be the effect
of TETRA's 17.6 waves per second on the brains of the police force? This
phenomena cannot be denied by the NRPB; it is listed in their own document
which I will refer to later in this paper, where on page 26 they have described
how at 8 waves per second animals can be made to fall asleep and at different
frequencies behave differently in various parts of their brains.
-
- As this phenomena is written about by the NRPB for 8
waves per second I would like to know what other research they have for
other frequencies in and around the TETRA range.
-
- HAARP, which is being researched by a nun, Dr Rosalie
Bertell, who is concerned about what it represents along with other scientists
knows that HAARP is capable of bouncing low level continuous microwave
radiation pulsed off the ionosphere to any community in the world and may
cause cataracts, leukaemia, changes in blood brain chemistry, changes in
blood sugar levels, blood pressure and heart rates.
-
- The paradox of course is how can one system of pulsed
microwaved radiation be used as a weapon to cause illness or death and
at the same frequency and unless close range, a similar low intensity be
used as a safe communications instrument. Following this research I fail
to see how TETRA can possibly be safe for the officers which use it.
-
- This argument is further reinforced by a Channel Four
document (Reference 16) and I quote: "The telecoms industry has known
about American research suggesting there may be brain effects from TETRA
for at least a year". "The research suggests that TETRA radios
may have a direct effect on the brain's bio chemistry". "The
researchers found that balance changed when brain cells were exposed to
pulsed radio signals".
-
- On page 4 it is quoted "the Government was warned
about the issue last year. The Stewart Report into mobile phones recommended
research into pulsed signals and suggested the technology be avoided As
a precautionary measure amplitude modulation (pulses) around 16 Hz should
be avoided if possible". He continues "what the frequency of
17.6 Hz is doing is duplicating microwave weapons which you buy at arms
fairs. So by holding one of these devices to their heads they are putting
a small microwave weapon to their head everytime they use it". He
finishes "but there is enough to warrant asking why the system is
being rolled out before the proper research has been conducted into an
effect which not only falls outside all the existing regulations but which
the Government advises on mobile phones believes it important enough they
recommend the technology not to be used and which the military authorities
apparently believe is so powerful that they can design non-lethal weapons
to disrupt the minds of their targets".
-
- In Electromagnetic Hazard & Therapy 2001, Volume
11, Numbers 2-4, Page 9, Simon Best says when writing about microwave crowd
control weapons "after 20 years of rumours and speculation the Pentagon
has finally confirmed that it has developed a device as part of its joint
non-lethal weapons programme " He continues "in the UK many of
the women protestors at Greenham Common in the 1980s experienced symptoms
that they attributed to being zapped by microwave weapons from the US base".
-
- Reported in The Guardian, Tuesday 8 May 2001 (Appendix
18) Stuart Millar and Stuart MacWilliam write "two independent experts
on the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation have accused Ministers
of using the police as guinea pigs by pressing on with the launch of the
BT Airwave System in the absence of detailed research into potential health
risks". They continue "last year Sir William Stewart's report
on mobile phone safety concluded that systems modulating at frequencies
around 16 Hz should be avoided if possible in future developments of signal
coding". They conclude "low frequency electromagnetic radiation
was identified as far back as the 1960s as a potential anti-personnel weapon
when the superpowers began conducting experiments into non-lethal mind
control devices".
-
- Low level pulsed signals have even been tried in the
oceans. It was reported (Reference 17) by Gibby Zobel that the whales and
dolphins beached themselves because their delicate navigation systems were
damaged by the low level pulses. This is not surprising as like us they
are mammals. The comment from the Minister at the time was "it's their
fault for being in that part of the ocean when they could have moved away".
-
- Reporting in The Sunday Express, 4 February 2001, Nick
Fleming writes "BT advise officers to turn off the handsets when they
are near sensitive hospital, breathalyser and speed camera equipment Officers
are also being advised to mount speed traps or breath tests only if the
equipment is 35 ft from their handsets or 11 ft from radio sets in their
cars". He concludes "someone using a TETRA handset will be receiving
between 2 and 4 times as much power or energy as if they were using a mobile
phone. The low frequency also means about double the penetration into the
head".
-
- Another document (Reference 18), Mr Stevens quoting from
a US Defence document writes "if the more advanced nations of the
West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards there
could be unfavourable effects on industrial output and military functions".
Listed in this document are all of the symptoms we now come to expect with
long-term low level microwave radiation; for example "personnel exposed
to microwave radiation below thermal levels experience more neurological
cardio-vascular and haemodynamic disturbances than do their unexposed counterparts".
Further down the document other symptoms include hypertension, changes
in blood, headache, fatigue, menstrual di
-
-
- ADDING UP ALL OF THE WAVES THAT YOU ARE EXPOSED TO
-
- An officer on duty may be exposed to his or her own handset,
plus the handsets of officers around, plus the transmitter, plus anything
else that happens to be on around them, i.e. vehicles. It may seem fairly
easy for people to think that all you have to do is add up the radiation
from each source, but in fact it can be very complicated and I would argue
so complicated that scientists have yet to agree on a standard formula.
-
- For example, when measuring the magnetic part of the
wave in Norwich it is known by some scientists that the maximum dose would
be 0.4 units. When the arithmetic average was taken it came out at 0.46
above the danger level for the child. When the interested parties came
and did their measurements they got the reading to be 0.26 units below
the safety level; they calculated the geometric average. Clearly there
is a difference between 0.26 and 0.46. When measurements are taken and
quoted to you, you should always ask how the answer has been calculated
and check the figures. Other ways of measuring waves may be time weighed
average, constructive or destructive interference, the polarisation, the
nearfield, the farfield, the root mean square, the peak to peak, the electric
or the magnetic vectors; all of these are legitimate calculations and in
my opinion could be used to make a reading look more acceptable if it was
desired.
-
- In Appendix 19 I enclose an e-mail conversation by three
eminent scientists who are trying to agree on the best way to calculate
multiple waves. The multiple wave phenomena is of concern to me with regards
the health of the police officers, simply because I have yet to find anybody
who can say for sure the dose that each officer will be receiving. Arguably
if the dose cannot be calculated therefore the health of the patients cannot
be calculated.
-
- Reporting in Engineering, February 2001 Matt Youson writes
about the case where a man had a heart attack and in his journey to the
hospital in an ambulance the ambulance crew using their TETRA sets, affected
his heart monitoring devices which sadly resulted in the man's death. In
an exclusive report in the Manchester News 11 May 2001 Dianne Bourne quoting
the Head of Brain Surgery at NASA writes "the Head of Brain Surgery
at NASA has even said he would not consider holding one of these to his
head (with regards to TETRA). He said the net result is that the police
are guinea pigs". Writing in Issue 51 of Caduceus magazine, in an
article entitled 'Mobile Phones: The Pressure & Evidence Continues
to Mount' by Simon Best, he writes "certainly if mobile phones had
been a new drug they would never have got out of the laboratory".
He continues commenting on TETRA "a 420 MHz signal producing a waveform
that maximises radiation absorption for 3-6 year olds but also a pulse
at 17 Hz right in the brains' beta rhythm - 17Hz is close to the peak frequency
that triggers calcium e-flux in the brain which in turn affects apoptosis
(programmed cell death) which can initiate cancer development. Despite
this there is a complete lack of research on TETRA's possible health effects".
He concludes "consider that you are talking about cumulative pulsed
microwave radiation into your head, eyes and other organs possibly everyday
for the rest of your life".
-
- A Powerwatch comment dated 2 June 2001 reports in the
first paragraph "as far as we can find out virtually no meaningful
biological research on the effects of TETRA signals has been carried out.
None of this is on humans nor is any on brain functions". In a late
study published this month by The Independent entitled 'Mobile Phone Use
Can Treble Risk of Brain Tumour', Charles Arthur writes that a research
paper studying 1,600 people by a cancer specialist at the University of
Sweden will be publishing his research paper on this data when it is finished.
-
- In 1997 the Health Council of The Netherlands Radio Frequency
Radiation Committee published their paper entitled 'Radio Frequency Electromagnetic
Fields (300 Hz to 300 GHz) (this is within the TETRA range). They warn
of interference to embryo development, hotspots inside the body, damage
to eyes specifically infants, elderly and the sick. They also comment on
interference to metallic implants and pacemakers. In Section 261 they write
"the effects of electromagnetic fields occur at lower powered entities
when the object is exposed to pulsed electromagnetic fields". I write
this because TETRA is pulsed and most of the research which has been done
has been done on continuous waves. The inference from these new research
papers can only suggest that the symptoms will become more serious as pulsed
radiation is arguably more aggressive.
-
- In a recent paper (Reference 19) Dr Hyland who is also
a member of the Stewart Committee and of the International Institute of
Biophysics in Germany writes in Section 3 "the introduction of TETRA
on the other hand gives rise to an increased level of both thermal and
non-thermal concern". On page 14 Dr Hyland comments on the expression
of calcium ions from brain cells and on page 15 writes a chapter on the
magnetic field associated with current surges from the battery of the phone.
Many people do not appreciate that batteries can produce magnetic fields
that go into the body.
-
-
- THE NRPB DOCUMENT ON TETRA (Appendix 20)
-
-
- The Governments' NRPB produced their own document (Reference
20) which is a report of an advisory group on non-ionising radiation and
TETRA. Each page I quote from I will photocopy and place in the Appendix
so that the reader may read the NRPB's research and the reader may compare
my answer to that research.
-
- On page 3 (Appendix 21) the picture shows the microwave
signals labelled radio signals as a continuous not-pulsed signal. I would
argue that this has been measured by the Cambridge researcher Alisdair
Philips and has been shown to be pulsed leaving the transmitter going to
the officer.
-
- Page 4 (Appendix 22), Section 21 states "some radiation
is also emitted from the case". It does not say which type of radiation
- electric or magnetic or when the radiation is emitted, or the strength
of the radiation or what part of the body will receive most of the exposure.
In Section 22 "the main exposure to the body should be from the antenna
and case of the hand portable". The question arises where is the rest
of the exposure coming from and how much will there be? Section 24 refers
to the earphone. If an earpiece is used and the smallest possible imaginable
crack occurs in the earpiece radiation will have a direct path straight
through the auditory canal to the brain. The officer will not even have
the protection of the skull. In the rough and tumble world of a police
officer where earpieces may be frequently knocked, what protection is there
for the officer in checking that the earpieces do not leak?
-
- I would recommend that earpieces should be checked with
very accurate equipment for leaks at least on a weekly basis. The earpieces
should be of the highest quality possible and definitely leakproof.
-
- Page 5, Section 25 (Appendix 23) "the terminal is
mounted inside the vehicle and connected to an antenna mounted on the outside".
My concern is what sort of insulation is there inside the vehicle to protect
the officers from the terminal inside the vehicle. If the terminal inside
the vehicle is not sufficiently insulated from the officers they are effectively
sitting inside a microwave oven, except for the windows.
-
- Page 6, Section 26 (Appendix 24) shows that the useful
range of a mobile terminal (car) to a transmitter is 56 km. 56 km is a
fairly powerful transmitter and again I question if an officer is standing
outside the vehicle or inside the vehicle, how much research has been done
on the radiation levels being received by this officer?
-
- Page 7, Section 28 (Appendix 25); this diagram shows
a vehicle being used as a transmitting station to relay a message 56 km
from a transmitter to 56 km to an officer. Again, I question how much insulation
there is to protect the officers from the radiation if they are to be used
as mobile transmitting stations?
-
- Page 8, Section 37 (Appendix 26); this confirms that
the pulses are 17.6 Hz and 35.2 Hz or waves per second. I emphasise that
the Stewart Committee warned about using frequencies close to the brain
above 16 Hz.
-
- Page 9, Sections 39/40 (Appendix 27) refer to a top output
in the table of 30 W and for hand terminals 3 W or 10 W for a vehicle mounted
transmitter. My concern is that with ordinary mobile phone transmitters
no sooner are they up when an engineer comes along and adds another section,
then another section and within a few years the original transmitter is
unrecognisable because of additional instruments. With TETRA when it expands
to cover all of the emergency services; possibly traffic wardens, the new
reserve police force, maybe even park keepers and security officers, I
am wondering whether these outputs may be exceeded. In my own mind I find
3 W and 10 W outputs particularly high when in proximity to a living being.
If we look at Professor Cherry's table (Appendix 27), it can be seen that
in millionths of watts, the long-term exposure can lead to various ailments.
On this graph I have drawn a line below which the TETRA power level applies.
This is obviously an estimate because when the handset is switched on,
there is a surge of power. If you are a long distance from a transmitter
the power increases, or on standby the power drops down. Due to the lack
of research in measuring TETRA in and around vehicles it is very difficult
to place an accurate estimate on this graph at present. Suffice to say
that the power on this table is in millionths of watts and Sections 39
and 40 are in watts. For the reader I have enclosed a three page guide
of reported biological effects from low level radiation.
-
- Page 10, Section 44 (Appendix 28); the table shows that
the TETRA handsets are slightly more powerful than the ordinary GSM mobile
phone systems. This is the basis of one of my arguments that if TETRA is
pulsed, which is arguably more aggressive and powerful than the ordinary
mobile phone, the medical symptoms could arguably be more severe.
-
- Page 14, Section 61 (Appendix 29) reads "hence with
TETRA the energy is absorbed in a larger volume of tissue and so is less
concentrated". Scientifically I cannot decide whether it is better
to have the energy spread over a larger area or concentrated on a smaller
area; I will have to discuss this with colleagues. Also in Section 61 the
NRPB write "however, since the radiation from TETRA penetrates further
into the head ", that I am particularly concerned about because the
most delicate parts of our brain are in its centre for maximum protection
and if this is where TETRA is going to reach then I have grave concerns.
-
- Page 15, Section 63 (Appendix 30) reads "VERY LITTLE
INFORMATION EXISTS ON THE SAR'S PRODUCED BY TETRA AND PORTABLES. NO NUMERICAL
MODELLING APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT". SAR means Specific Absorption
Rate and refers to the heat generated inside that part of the body exposed
to microwave radiation. I mentioned heat earlier with regard to heat shock
proteins protecting cancer cells and to prevent damage to the DNA. I find
it absolutely beyond belief that the NRPB can admit they have very little
information on a system that is already being used and to say that no numerical
modelling appears to have been carried out suggests to me as a scientist
that no measurements have been taken to assess any medical damage which
may occur to the officers. What experimentation has been done (Gabriel
2000), appears to have been carried out by Mr Gabriel of Microwave Consultants
Limited. As this research could possibly affect what may turn out to be
brain tumours or spine cancers for the lady or gentlemen officers I would
feel justified as a Police Federation in asking which totally independent
scientists not connected in any way to the Government or communications
industry peer reviewed this research paper and what were there comments?
-
- Page 15, Section 65 (Appendix 30); this section explains
that SARs could be up to 4 times larger than those in table 6 above. If
the reader looks at the unit at the top of the table after SAR (Wkg-1),
the reader can go to Appendix 27 'Reported Biological Effects', and the
reader will observe one of the pages lists the medical symptoms expected
from SAR doses. The reader will notice that for an SAR of 2 or 3 W/kg,
cancer acceleration in the skin and breast tumours may be found. Coming
back to the table it shows for the left ear an SAR of 2.88 but in the document
below it explains that the SAR could be 4 times larger than this, i.e.
you could be receiving an SAR above 8.
-
- Page 11, Section 51 (Appendix 31) (NB: the NRPB bound
document has pages 11-13 out of order and I cannot change this, and I apologise
to the reader). This table shows that the power output may reach 40 W from
a TETRA transmitter. My concern is that the officer will be receiving the
radiation from the transmitter as well as the radiation from the handset.
-
- Page 16, Section 66 (Appendix 32); "the main exposure
to the body is expected to be at waist level from the antenna and base
of the hand portable". My concern with this is the reported cases
of cancer of the spine from officers who have carried their hand portables
on their belts. To my knowledge 4 deaths have occurred because of this.
-
- "Although there could be some exposure from the
earphone if RF current is induced in the cable ". When the signal
goes from the handset to the earpiece, electromagnetic waves are emitted
from the cable, i.e. the cable actually becomes its own transmitter. These
waves would obviously go through the neck and my concern is that they could
affect the sensitive glands within the neck. Another concern, but unproven,
came from a dentist who was concerned about the metal in peoples' fillings
absorbing radiation and re-emitting it up into the centre of the brain
where there is no protection from the skull. This is obviously a very complex
research area to go into but nevertheless I feel that this dentist has
a justifiable argument and one which should not be dismissed without thought.
-
- Page 16, Section 67; "the situation is complicated
by the metal body of the vehicle. It is not evident that this could be
relied upon to provide shielding, since the non-conducting parts, e.g.
windows of the vehicle are comparable to the wavelength of the radiation".
Scientifically what this means to me is that there could be a considerable
risk of electromagnetic radiation for the persons either inside or just
outside of the vehicle. I find this incredible in so far as the risk is
obviously appreciated by the NRPB and yet, as they stated earlier, no numerical
modelling has been carried out. To me it appears that the risk in and around
vehicles has been overlooked.
-
- Page 16, Section 68; "the data in table 6 suggest
that for both 3 W and 10 W vehicle mounted terminals the ICNIRP basic restrictions
for the general public could be exceeded if a persons' head were within
a few centimetres of a vehicle mounted transmission antenna for several
minutes". The question I ask is what if the call is some big disaster
emergency and the call may last longer than several minutes, or once the
system is upgraded you are waiting for pictures to come through? Have calculations
been done for say an accumulative 10 minute call?
-
- NB: The Police Federation may wish to ask whether the
dose levels in these tables are calculated as a geometric average or arithmetic
average.
-
- Page 16, Section 69; "at these power levels there
will be regions in the immediate vicinity of the base station antenna where
guidelines could be exceeded". My argument here is similar to the
argument above. What if an officer has to remain through duty in the vicinity
of a base station or transmitter where even the NRPB's high guidelines
are exceeded or the International Commission's guidelines are exceeded?
These guidelines, as shown in Appendix 1, are way above what the rest of
the world recommends.
-
- Page 18, Section 76 (Appendix 33); "no measurements
appear to have been made of the exposures received inside or outside vehicles
with externally mounted antennas". My simple question is, if officers
are using what could be potentially dangerous instruments, why have no
measurements been taken to assess their risk? I find this beyond belief.
-
- Page 26, Section 111 and 112 (Appendix 34). Here the
NRPB agree that the phenomena of non-lethal weapons exists because they
say that with a frequency of 8 waves per second into the brain, animals
can be made to go to sleep, or be stimulated at higher frequencies. To
me this simple statement by the NRPB verifies the non-lethal weapons programme
as sound.
-
- Page 29, Section 128 (Appendix 35); "HOWEVER THERE
ARE LIMITATIONS TO THE REASSURANCE THAT THEY CAN PROVIDE. IN PARTICULAR
THEY DO NOT EXCLUDE THE POSSIBILITY THAT RF RADIATION FROM CELLULAR PHONES
MIGHT CARRY A RISK OF CANCER THAT BECOMES MANIFEST MANY YEARS AFTER FIRST
EXPOSURE OR THAT RELATES TO INTENSE EXPOSURE OVER MANY YEARS. NOR DO THEY
RULE OUT A HAZARD FROM RF RADIATION MODULATED SPECIFICALLY AT AROUND 16
Hz". Here, the NRPB are not ruling out that there may be a risk of
cancer to the officers in several years time. Also there could be a risk
because of TETRA's unique pulsing to the officers' brains.
-
- Page 29, Section 129; "further research is needed
using modern molecular and cellular biology techniques to assess the reliability
of the positive findings and to determine the extent and significance of
any effects that do occur". Scientifically to me, what the NRPB are
saying is that they need to do research to find out what effects TETRA
will have on the officers.
-
- Page 30, Section 133 (Appendix 36); "HOWEVER THEY
DO NOT EXCLUDE THE POSSIBILITY OF A RISK OF CANCER THAT APPEARS ONLY AFTER
MANY YEARS OF EXPOSURE, NOR OF A HAZARD FROM RF RADIATION MODULATED SPECIFICALLY
AT AROUND 16 Hz". This suggests that cancer and brain damage has not
been ruled out as a possibility of using TETRA. As an analogy, this seems
to me like a situation where I could go to my GP and ask for some tablets
and the GP can say, you can take these but there may be a risk of cancer
in several years time, I don't know, or a risk of brain damage.
-
- Page 31, Section 135 (Appendix 37); "A number of
recommendations for further research are suggested by the Advisory Group".
My observation is why wasn't this research was done before the system was
introduced? This puts officers' health at risk unnecessarily.
-
- "Proposals for experimental investigations of the
possible biological effects of specific TETRA signals modulated at about
16Hz". Again, I suggest this should have been carried out before it
was used on police officers.
-
- "Further studies need to be carried out on effects
of amplitude modulation or pulsing on neuronal activity and on signalling
within and between nerve cells The likelihood of epileptic seizures could
be investigated ". If the NRPB are suggesting this now, my question
stands, why wasn't this research carried out before the officers began
their trials with TETRA?
-
- * Page 31, Section 135 - Section 5; "HUMAN VOLUNTEER
STUDIES SHOULD BE CARRIED OUT TO MEASURE CHANGES IN COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE
ARISING FROM EXPOSURE TO TETRA HANDSETS. THESE SHOULD INCLUDE EXAMINATION
OF THE EFFECT OF VARYING PARAMETERS SUCH AS THE DURATION OF CALLS, THE
EXTENT OF EXPOSURE, AS WELL AS SIGNAL CHARACTERISTICS".
-
- * Page 31, Section 135 - Section 6; "THE TETRA SYSTEM
IS EXPECTED TO BE DEPLOYED WIDELY FOR USE BY STAFF IN EMERGENCY SERVICES.
THIS IS A RELATIVELY STABLE WORKFORCE WITH DEFINED PATTERNS OF WORK. IT
WOULD BE WORTH CARRYING OUT STUDIES TO EXAMINE WORKING PRACTICES AND CONDITIONS
OF EXPOSURE TO RF RADIATION FROM TETRA SYSTEMS. RECORDS OF USE SHOULD BE
KEPT WHICH COULD BE OF VALUE IN ANY FUTURE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES".
Clearly this means that the police, although to my knowledge not volunteers,
as a regular and stable workforce are absolutely ideal for a scientific
study into the long-term effects of electromagnetic radiation from TETRA.
The NRPB will use all of this data as an epidemiological study, as recorded
in their own document.
-
- * Page 31, Section 135 - Section 8; "ONLY LIMITED
INFORMATION IS PRESENTLY AVAILABLE ON EXPOSURES FROM TETRA HAND PORTABLES.
FURTHER WORK IS NEEDED TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ON EXPOSURES FROM HAND
PORTABLES AND FROM ANY OTHER TRANSMITTING EQUIPMENT DEPLOYED FOR USE".
My simple observation to this statement is why? Why is only limited information
presently available on exposures if the system is up and running? There
has got to be a risk to the officers from unknown exposures.
-
-
- CONCLUSION
-
- If you take a complete overview of this entire document,
I would suggest that there is a lot of information which could suggest
long-term low level exposure to microwave radiation is harmful. However,
science is always about argument. I find it a very dangerous time when
a scientist insists that he or she is right. Scientists that have insisted
they are right (sometimes publicly) and have later to have been shown to
be incorrect are those concerning thalidomide, asbestos, BSE, smoking,
sheep dip, Gulf War Syndrome, GM foods, Vitamin B6, to mention just a few.
So, let us assume that I am wrong and let us assume that every single scientist
I have quoted in this report, which may involve thousands of years of work
accumulatively, is also wrong, just for arguments sake. My argument is
unchanged and my argument is simple. All I am suggesting is that the ladies
and gentlemen of the police force have the opportunity to read both sides
of this scientific debate with all of the literature at their disposal
and they, be allowed to decide whether or not they would like to use the
TETRA system. If every officer decides that they love the TETRA system
so much they want to take it home to bed with them, I do not have a problem
with that. All I ask is that the officers have the choice where their long-term
future health could be at risk.
-
-
- RECOMMENDATIONS
-
- * I would like to see a totally independent group of
scientists, not connected with the communications industry or the NRPB,
be able to represent the police force at th
-
- * Should TETRA become widespread, a long-term full indemnity
insurance policy should be guaranteed for the officers for any possible
future long-term risks.
-
- * That all major documents relating to TETRA safety be
made available to the officers of the police force along with how the figures
were calculated, i.e. which average was taken, which totally independent
scientists peer reviewed the papers, the comments of those scientists and
if necessary, the relative expertise of the scientist who carried out the
experiments and wrote the paper.
-
- I recommend this because when I applied to teach Advance
Level Physics at College, all of my degrees are personally checked and
when we go camping with College students, our mountain leadership certificates,
life-saving certificates, updates to those certificates are all scrutinised
by the parents. And I totally agree with this. I believe that if you are
making decisions pertaining to persons' safety or health, your qualifications,
background, experience should all be available for scrutiny. Also, anything
that you write should be checked by totally independent persons, and their
comments made available.
-
- * My final recommendation with all of the information
I have to hand is that the TETRA system be halted until further research
on safety has been carried out. This research be made available to the
ladies and gentlemen of the police force and not until they are satisfied
with the safety of the system, should it be implemented. In other words,
I am suggesting that the police have the final say in whether TETRA is
introduced or not to their force. I believe the ladies and gentlemen of
the police force should be credited with the intelligence they have to
make decisions regarding their own safety. Further, any scientific document
written for them to read should have full explanatory notes so that they
can understand any complicated scientific terms.
-
- NB: Before my lectures to the Police Federation and writing
this report, I submitted my full CV for their scrutiny.
-
-
- QUESTIONS
-
- * With all of the research written here showing dangers
from electric, magnetic, pulsed microwave electromagnetic fields, why with
the officers' safety at risk are we still sticking to our ridiculous safety
limit, which only measures heat?
-
- * Can more information be given to the officers on our
Government's non-lethal weapons programme concerning pulses into the brain
around 17.6 Hz, or stored information from other research papers?
-
- * Can the signals from the transmitter to the officer
be rechecked as they are listed in the manual as continuous waves, whereas
they have been measured independently to be shown to be pulsed? This is
important because pulsed radiation is arguably more aggressive than continuous.
-
- NB: the following questions arise from the NRPB document
on TETRA, Volume 12, Number 2, 2001, appendixed at the back of this document.
-
- * Section 21 - How much radiation, and of which type
is emitted from the case?
-
- * Section 24 - What safeguards are in place to guarantee
that the earphones are absolutely leakproof and with the rough and tumble
world of the police officer, how often are the earphones going to be checked
for leaks? Who will do this, and which type of apparatus will be used?
-
- * Section 25 - What experiments have been done to measure
how the officers inside the vehicle are insulated from the transmitting
device?
-
- * Section 28 - If a police car is to be used as a relay
transmitter, again, what measurements have been taken to ensure the officers
are insulated from the electromagnetic waves?
-
- * Section 37 - Why is a pulsed frequency of 17.6 Hz being
used when it is known to interfere with the brains' beta rhythm and it
was warned against by the Stewart Committee?
-
- * Section 39/40 - If TETRA becomes widespread to all
of the emergency services, reserve officers, traffic wardens, security
officers, what is the expected output to be from handsets and the main
transmitters? Transmitters generally increase their power to cope with
additional calls. Will this be the case for TETRA?
-
- * Section 61 - Has a neurosurgeon been consulted to comment
on the effect of TETRA penetrating deep into the head?
-
- * Section 63 - Why does very little information exist
on the SAR produced by TETRA hand portables, why has no numerical modelling
been carried out? Can this be done before TETRA is used nationally?
-
- * Section 63 - Can all of the information relating to
the experiments of measuring radiation inside the head (Gabriel 2000) be
made available to the Police Federation for scrutiny, along with an independent
peer review assessment from scientists, totally unconnected with the NRPB
or communications industry?
-
- * Section 65 - If the SAR's could be up to 4 times larger
than those in table 6, what risk assessment has been carried out for officers
receiving radiation with an SAR of over 8 W/kg? Can this information be
made available to the Police Federation?
-
- * Section 66 - With the main exposure expected to be
at waist level, what research has been carried out relating this to the
known deaths of officers from spine cancer from carrying transmitters on
their belts? Could this research be made available to the Police Federation?
-
- * Section 66 - Has an ear, nose and throat specialist
been contacted for an opinion concerning radiation from the cable being
transmitted into the glands of the neck? If not, could this be done?
-
- * Section 67 - As vehicles cannot be relied upon to provide
shielding for the officers, can further improvements to insulate the officers
be recommended, then scientific studies carried out to test this insulation
and all data be made available to the Police Federation?
-
- * Section 68 - If international guidelines could be exceeded,
what risk assessment has been carried out for the officers and passers
by who may be using pacemakers, insulin pumps, have metal plates in their
bodies, or be epileptic? Could this risk assessment be made available to
the Police Federation?
-
- Similarly, for Section 69, concerning base station transmitters
which will also exceed guidelines.
-
- * Section 76 - Why have no measurements of exposures
been made inside or outside vehicles? Could these be done and the data
made available to the Police Federation along with how averages are calculated?
-
- * Section 128 - As the possibility is not excluded that
TETRA might carry a risk of cancer that becomes manifest many years after
first exposure, or there may be a hazard from the pulses around 16 Hz,
would it be a good idea to allow the ladies and gentlemen of the police
force an opinion in the decision making processes which may concern their
long-term health? Should these long-term health risks be published for
the police force so that, like members of the armed forces, they may volunteer
to expose themselves to possible danger?
-
- * Section 129 - As further research is needed, should
this not be done before TETRA becomes national, and can the results be
made available to the Police Federation for their scrutiny?
-
- * Section 133 - Again, the possibility of a risk of cancer
after many years of exposure is commented on along with the hazard of pulsed
radiation at 16 Hz. I repeat my observation that this risk assessment ought
to be made available with full consultation with the officers concerned
who will be using the system and that they should have the final decision
concerning their future health risks. Is this a possibility?
-
- * Section 135, Section 2 - Has a neurosurgeon been contacted
to assess the risk of pulsing and its effect on the signalling mechanisms
between nerve cells? Could this report please be made available to the
Police Federation?
-
- * Section 135, Section 5 - Shouldn't the human volunteers
study on TETRA be carried out before its use becomes widespread?
-
- * Section 135, Section 6 - As an epidemiological study
is recommended to be carried out on the use of TETRA and its effects on
"a relatively stable workforce with defined patterns of work",
shouldn't the police officers be asked their permission if they are going
to take part in what is a long-term medical study which may result in a
number of brain tumours, spine tumours, eye cancers, heart disorders and
many other illnesses?
-
- * Section 135, Section 8 - Why is TETRA being used by
officers if "only limited information is presently available on exposures
from TETRA hand portables and further work is needed to provide more information
on exposures from hand portables and from any other transmitting equipment"?
-
- LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
-
- Although I have legal documents in my possession I do
not have the knowledge or confidence to even begin to try and explain legal
words. I would recommend the Federation's solicitor contact Mr Alan Meyer
who is in my opinion this country's leading authority on matters electromagnetic
and all of its relevant implications. I would add I do not have shares
in his firm nor do I receive "backhanders", in fact I have never
met the gentleman. Mr Meyer will be able to advise on Government responsibilities,
the human rights, civil rights and European Law. Mr Meyer may be contacted
at:
-
- Halsey Meyer Higgins Solicitors
- 56 Buckingham Gate
- Westminster
- London
- SW1E 6AE
-
- Tel: 020 7828 8772
- Fax: 020 7828 8774
-
- Researched and written by B Trower, September 2001
-
- REFERENCES
-
- 1. Electromagnetic Hazard & Therapy 2000, Volume
10, Numbers 3 & 4
-
- 2. Evidence that Electromagnetic Radiation is Genotoxic:
The implications for the epidemiology of cancer and cardiac, neurological
and reproductive effects. Dr Neil Cherry, June 2000
-
- 3. Electromagnetic Hazard & Therapy 2000, Volume
10, Numbers 3 & 4
-
- 4. Extremely Low Frequencies and living matter - a new
biophysics by Dr Gilles Picard. Living matter and electronic devices
-
- 5. Potential Adverse Health Impacts of Mobile Telephony
Memorandum, Dr Hyland, February 2000
-
- 6. Are Mobile Telephony Base Stations a Potential Health
Hazard? A review of the present scientific literature, Roger Coghill MA
(Cantab.) C. Biol. MI Biol. MA (Environ. Mgt.), August 1998
-
- 7. New Medical Evidence on Electromagnetic Fields and
Health is Alarming: Do no Expose Local People to Mobile Phone Base Stations,
Dr D A Eklund, BSc MBCHB MFPHM
-
- 8. Electromagnetic Hazard & Therapy 1999, Volume
10, Numbers 1 & 2
-
- 9. Effects of chronic microwave irradiation on mice,
S Prausnitz & C Susskind, 1962
-
- 10. Scientists link eye cancer to mobile phones, Sunday
Times, 14 January 2001
-
- 11. Electromagnetic Hazard & Therapy 2001, Volume
11, Numbers 2 to 4
-
- 12. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 80-107, 4 December 1979
-
- 13. Understanding Ground Currents: An important factor
in electromagnetic exposure, Dr D Dahlberg, Consultant, The Electromagnetics
Research Foundation, Moorhead, MN56560/2118
-
- 14. Electromagnetic Field-induced Stimulation of Bruton's
Tyrosine Kinase, Journal of Biological Chemistry, Volume 273, Number 20,
2 February 1998
-
-
-
- Stimulation of Src Family Protein-tyrosine Kinases as
a Proximal and Mandatory Step for SYK Kinase-dependent Phospholipase Cy2
Activation in Lymphoma B Cells Exposed to Low Energy Electromagnetic Files,
Journal of Biological Chemistry, Volume 273, Number 7, 13 February 1998
-
- 15. Nexus: Military Use of Mind Control Weapons, Judy
Wall, Volume 5, Number 6, November 1998
-
-
-
- The Encyclopaedia of Mind Control, Adventures Unlimited
Press, 1997
-
- Secret & Suppressed, Jim Keith, Feral Press, 1993
-
- Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War, Dr Rosalie Bertell
(Women's Press)
-
- Mind Control & the UK (Remote Viewing), Tim Rifat,
ISBN 0712679081
-
- Neurophysiologic Effects of RF and MW Radiation, Ross
Adey, Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Volume 55, Number 11,
December 1979
-
- The Influences of Impressed Electrical Fields at EEG
Frequencies on Brain and Behaviour, Burch & Altshuler, Plenum Press,
1975
-
- Effects of modulated very high frequency fields on specific
brain rhythms in cats, Brain Research, Volume 58, 1973 (Also Volume 23,
1967) on low frequency re-brain (Hippocampus)
-
- Non-Lethality: John B Alexander, the Pentagon's Penguin,
by Armen Victorian, Lobster June 1993
-
- 16. Channel Four News, Radio System Safety Fears, 5 February
2001, Julian Rush
-
-
- 17. The Big Issue Environment Correspondent Gibby Zobel,
New Navy Death Risk to Dolphins & Whales, page 5, 12 March 2001
-
-
- 18. Extracts from US Defence Intelligence Agency documents
from 1972 to 1983, Donald Stevens, November 2000
-
-
- 19. The Physiological & Environmental Effects of
Non-ionising Electromagnetic Radiation, Dr G J Hyland, February 2001
-
- 20. NRPB Possible Health Affects from Terrestrial Trunked
Radio (TETRA), Volume 12, Number 2, 2001
-
-
- Erratum Page 13 Hyland and Coghiill (they sent evidence
to IEGMP but were not actual members: JVM 28/9/2001)
-
- APPENDICES
-
- This online version of the report does not have the appendices,
it was commissioned for the Police Federation, if you require a copy of
the appendices email us
-
- Note the appendices are not suitable for sending by email,
therefore a postal address must be included. A minimum donation of £2
towards post and copying appreciated.
-
- PLEASE NOTE: This version is complete (less appendices),
the reason for the difference in the number of pages is that in the original
the lines are double spaced (65 pages) in this HTM version the lines are
single spaced (20 plus pages).
-
- Download Word Version
-
- http://www.planningsanity.co.uk/reports/trower.htm
- <http://www.tetrawatch.net/main/index.php>
-
- For More Information On These Dangers:
-
- http://www.tetrawatch.net/main/index.php
|
