Together Against Masts (TAM)

[Mitch]

Newsletter and minutes of meeting coming shortly.

Latest news is the refusal of the telecommunications mast intended for placement on Lima Engineering near Walverden Reservoir in Nelson.

Counsellors voted against the Mast after a petition was handed to them from 649 local residents who are most concerning about the perceived health risks of these latest 3G Masts, plus the fact that they are not being consulted at all by local government prior to planning approval.

Together Against Masts (TAM) has been going for 5 years in the Burnley and Pendle area and now has nearly 4000 members (local residents in the area). The campaign is building and I'll be reporting progress in this thread.

[michele cryer]

Wow! Well done Mitch...thanks for getting going on this issues...I look forward to reading the minutes etc.

[Mitch]

www.thisislancashire.co.uk/lancashire/archive/2005/01/13/NEWSNEL0ZM.html

Article on refusal of Nelson telecommunications Mast

[michele cryer]

I love this bit!! Such compassion on that part of the planning committee...to consider the health of the residents!!! NOT


Southfield's Coun Sonia Robinson said: "It is intimidating to people and that there is a health risk should be sufficient to turn it down.

"I don't like being in a room with people who smoke and it's been found passive smoking is just as harmful. In the future it may be found we are being harmed by mobile phones. I'm totally against it."

Co-opted committee member Susan Nike said: "Why shouldn't we mention health risks? The damage may not be proven but we don't know, and we should err on the side of caution."

Bradley Councillor Mohammed Iqbal suggested putting a ban on mobile phone masts in Pendle, similar to the one on housing in the borough.

But executive director for services John Kirk said such a move would fail. He said turning the application down on the grounds it would affect the landscape of the area was more likely to succeed in the event of a planning appeal.

[Deecan]

TAM has been going for 5 years now. Support is growing and we now have around 4000 members in Burnley and Nelson
I believe we need many more, for only then will the politicians have no alternative but to accept our clear evidence that masts, as used in the UK, are very dangerous.
We need the safe power as proposed by independent scientists from around the World, who made proposals at their conference in Salzburg. Tests showed that at this minimal. but safe power, phones worked perfectly, but not inside buildings and cars. { Not a bad thing anyway }. So looking at it from this aspect, we are being put at risk for purely commercial reasons, so that phone operators can , and do, advertise the case for a single phone and do away with landlines.
China too is actively researching a system using this ultra low power and have mini microcells on every street corner, in order to safeguard their citizens.
WHY SHOULD WE MILDLY ACCEPT ALL THE SPIN GIVEN TO US BY THE GOVERNMENT. They have received in excess of £ 65billion in the last 4 years, so we know why they are keen to roll out the system so quickly.
The onus should be upon the Government and the Operators to show that the system is safe, rather than asking the objectors to prove that it is dangerous. Evidence has been constantly put before them , all of which has been rejected for one reason or another. Not one single piece of Government research has been produced that shows the technology is safe.
It costs nothing to join us, so please sign up before it is too late.
Also I urge everyone to to write letters to their MP and also to the local and national press giving your objections.
We have regular information meetings to show the latest results of research. We also have meters to check the radiation in your homes. Just ask us !
Finally we are anxious to receive financial contributions { however small } to help us to continue our fight. Please help !

[michele cryer]

Hiya Deecan...welcome to the board and thanks for this and your other post...which I haven't yet had the time to fully study but will do, I promise!

I think yours is a very important campaign, and fully back it based on the evidence I have read about so far.

it is unfortunate that mobile phones have become such an almost 'essential' part of our lives now...fewer and fewer public telephones around these days, fear of being mugged etc. is causing younger teens as well as adults to use them more frequently.

The new safer ideas you mentioned in other countries sound ideal, and I would back up any action to change to these...

Please let me know how locals can join your group and where and when your next meeting is to be held.

[Deecan]

Thanks for your support Michelle.
I agree that mobile phones do offer many benefits, the question is whether they offer greater safety is not so obvious. The recent murder of the girl student { the twin, whose name escapes me } was carrying her mobile, indeed she sent quite a few text messages, but still she was killed. I think they are a comfort for parents whose child is away from home, but probably not at risk.
You have to question is that parental comfort worth the risk of the child carrying { and using } something that could cause them serious health problems, possibly even a fatal result ?If you could show that home contact could be secured by carrying about a live hand grenade or a phial of cyanide, how many parents would allow that. I suspect theywould find alternative safer ways of knowing where their children are. There are many reported cases of workmen contracting liver cancer after carrying their mobile in their tool belt. Indeed I personally know of two cases where friends of mine gpot a bad leg and a pronounced limp. Theyhad been wearing their phones on their normal belt. In each case their legs got better after stopping that practice. One of them thought it may just be coincidental and so resumed wearing it on his belt only to find his leg got bad again. Needless to say he stopped doing it and neither have had any leg problems since.
The low power system proposed by scientists at salzburg ad currently a part of chinese research would offer all the benefits of 2G phones but none of the healkth hazards.
As for the new 3G phones, which use a higher frequency of microwave radiation and so is considered even more dangerous than the 2G technology is nothing more than a toy. It does not offer any more comforting communication, rather it just allows access to the internet, photographs and games. So I ask what benefit is that to the community ?? We are being put at risk to allow certain individuals to play games !
We are seeking to increase our membership as quickly as possible so that National and Local politicians will have to succomb to our demands.
To join we simple need name { two for couples or more for those with adult children }. address, phone number and ideally e mail address. It is free !

[michele cryer]

Thank you Deecan. I can appreciate your fear of the shortcomings of mobile phones in the situation that you noted...the young lady who was killed at the New Year in spite of contacting her friends on the Mobile Phone. These sorts of situations will always occur tho, I suppose...as they would occur in places where there are also phone boxes...if you are alone and someone attacks you/drags you away from the means of making contact then it is just the same. I must admit that I do worry when my daughter is out at night, going into town centres dancing and drinking, in case something happens to her, but I do always insist that she has her phone with her and that she doesn't get separated from her friends. I also ring her once or twice whilst she is out to ensure that she is feeling okay. If there was a better way of ensuring her safety than this, then I would use it of course. The Chinese method sounds interesting.

I do not think it is worth risking the health of the nation more by introducing stronger masts to cope with the requirements of camera/video/games/internet phones, as there are, I agree, just toys.

Anyway, as far as joining and supplying the necessary name/address/tel nos/email addies. would it be wise to PM these details to you on here? Or would you prefer it if members passed this info onto me and I could contact your group to enlist those people....is there a telephone number for joining?

[Deecan]

I appreciate your comments about joined us Michelle.
Here is my alternative e mail address , [e-mail] anyone wishing to join can send their name address, phone number and e mail address there. I will add them to our ever growing list.

Our next meeting will be held in the Council Chamber at Padiham Town Hall on Wednesday 9th February 2005, starting at 7.30pm. We always need active people to help in our campaign. I suppose that people could mail us there as Together Against Masts, c/o Padiham Town Hall, Padiham. If they send their information or wish to make any financial donations to our fund then they could use that address.

[michele cryer]

Thank you Deecan...I hope the support for your campaign continues to grow..

[Mitch]

Letter sent to the Nelson Leader today, with much help from Deecan - many thanks Mitch

Dear Nelson Leader,

I am responding to the letter in the Nelson Leader on 21st January from Brian Latimer, landowner on which the proposed 30m telecommunication mast was proposed at the Lima Engineering site in Nelson.

I am amazed that he should deplore the conduct of the 600 plus local residents and councillors that opposed this plan. HIS MAIN CONCERN WAS FOR THE LOSS OF CONSIDERABLE REVENUE THAT HE WOULD PERSONALLY RECEIVE IN RENTAL FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS. He completely ignores the real health concerns of the local people who would have to suffer this microwave radiation into their homes for this length of time.

He calls the protesters scaremongers. Is Mr Latimer a more eminent scientist that Prof Sir William Stewart, Head of the National Radiological Protection Board, who only this month warned people to stop children using mobile phones and also proposed that phone masts should be kept away from sensitive areas , like schools, hospitals and RESIDENCES. Or does this landowner, looking to make an easy income know something that we don't ? If he has proof that these masts are safe, then he should publish it now and put our minds at rest. Goodness knows that nobody else in the World has yet been able to prove their long term safety. We would be greatly indebted to hear from him where he has found all this NEW information.

He tries to blame the local Liberal Democrats as being the alien feature. I can assure
Mr. Latimer that our only concern is the well being of our residents, particularly the young, the old and the many people who are sensitive to this radiation.

Perhaps Mr Latimer would like to share with us the amount in rent site fees he was due to receive over the next 10 years from Hutchison?

Yours faithfully

Mitch !

[michele cryer]

Well done Mitch...typical bloody landowner!

[Deecan]

Here is an item in the Southport press. A typical report.
Mast is ruining health of my family, claims worried father





A FAMILY from Marshside have barricaded their house with specialist insulation to protect themselves from mast radiation.

John O’Hanlon and wife Angela, along with their 11-month-old son James, claim their health has been suffering as a result of living opposite a mast in Fylde Road.

The family moved into a caravan for six months last year to avoid the mast and put their house on the market.

The house is still up for sale and Mr and Mrs O’Hanlon were forced to move back in just before Christmas when the caravan park closed for the winter. Now they have kitted out their loft and windows with shielding material to protect them from the mast - which is just 150 metres away in Slaidburn Crescent.

However, a spokesman for Orange, the company which owns the mast, said it emits little more power than a household lightbulb.

Mr O’Hanlon, 41, told The Champion: “We moved into our house in 2000 about the same time that Professor Stewart’s report assured us that there would be no ill effects of living near a mobile phone base station.

“My wife and I were enthusiastic about doing work on the house (decorating etc) and we were both full of energy. Within six months we were both feeling tired with no real cause.

“Then around 12 months later I had a problem with the beating of my heart which turned out to be a condition similar to what our prime minister has had an operation to cure. The heart, incidentally, receives it’s instructions from the brain and the waves are known as ‘Delta’ brainwaves. It is my belief that the emissions from base stations and indeed phones interfere with our Delta brain waves - these are the ones which we experience in deep sleep. I have been hospitalised twice now in four years - once which required my heart be stopped and started.”

He added: “To cut a long story short right up until March 2004 we gradually felt more and more run down. In February 2004 my wife gave birth to a beautiful baby boy weighing in at seven-and-a-half-pounds. Over the next two months, however things went from bad to worse. In March 2004, incidentally the Orange transmitter which we live near was upgraded to the 3G technology.”

Mr O’Hanlon and 32-year-old Angela then found that their bouncing baby boy wasn’t eating, was vomiting and cried all the time when he was at home but the minute he was taken away from the house he was eating well and was a much more content baby.

Mr O’Hanlon, who owns a printing business, continued: “By June my wife was at her wits end and we had both come to the conclusion that we had to move out of our home. I was unable to afford a second mortgage and couldn’t afford to rent either. Angela came up with the idea to buy a cheap caravan and put it on a site and move into it - which is what we did from June to December 2004. We were amazed at the results - immediately we were all able to sleep properly and James started to progress. We noticed also that whenever my wife returned to the house to do any chores that the baby would cry constantly with no obvious cause. We had no choice but to keep him away as much as possible.

“One thing both my wife and myself realised was that we were dreaming again - something that didn’t happen much at home.

“On doing research we came across Gerard Hyland’s information on how the pulsing of the emissions can affect our delicate biochemistry and the functioning of our brains. I spoke with my uncle and he suggested shielding the house, which seemed absurd at the time.

“In December this year we were compelled to move back home (which is on the market at a reduced price but hasn’t sold) as the caravan park is closed during the winter so we decided to follow up on my uncle’s advice. We purchased the shielding material and proceeded to fit out the loft and windows the first week in January this year. In between the Christmas and New Year, before we fitted the shielding, we were unable to sleep and the baby was restless, although much better than earlier. We put this down to the fact that his head has grown the scull together and he has no soft bit. During the first week in January we finished the whole loft and to our amazement we found that we all sleep very well indeed.”

Mr O’Hanlon says he does have a mobile phone, but uses it only for emergencies and has it switched off at home.

The family are still hoping to sell their house and move away and last week appeared on North West Tonight about the problem.

A spokesman for Orange said: “There are about 40,000 mobile phone masts in this country and not all cause health problems so this issue would seem inconsistent.

“All our base stations comply with stringent European and national guidelines and there is no more power in one of our masts than any other. They do not emit radiation as such but use radiowaves, like televisions, radios, cordless phones, mobile phones, baby monitors - anything mobile that communicates from A to B, so that puts things in perspective.

“There is no evidence to suggest that mobile phone technology causes ill health.”

Edition: SOU

Category: News

NOTE THE REPONSE FROM THE OPERATOR! ALWAYS HIDING BEHIND THE UK GUIDELINES THAT ARE AT ODDS WITH MOST OF THE REST OF THE WORLD. ALSO SOME PEOPLE ARE MORE SENSITIVE AND HAVE ADVERSE EFFECTS QUICKLY. IT IS A BIT LIKE HAVING AN ALLERGY, BUT CONTINUOUS EXPOSURE WILL AFFECT MANY MORE PEOPLE.

Deecan

[Deecan]

Please make sure you record or watch BBC2 this Saturday 29th Jan. at 9.00.a.m. in the morning when they will be showing a documentary on electrosensitivity.

This will explain how some people have severe reactions sooner than others.

deecan

[Mitch]

Check out the Nelson Leader letters page today (Friday, 28th January 2005).

The whole of the Letters page is crammed with letters protesting and counteracting Brian Latimer's letter of attack on the community campaign against the telecommunications Mast on the Lima Engineering site in Nelson. Brian Latimer is the land owner of the site, and would have received a considerable sum in rent site fees had the Mast not been refused at Nelson Town Hall.

Ra ra Nelson!!!

best mitch

PS. Special thanks to Deecan for helping me with my letter.

[Deecan]

An Anti Mast Campaigner with a very high Nationwide public profile is Eileen O'Connor. She has suffered from breast cancer, which she attributes to the radiation from a mast close to her home near Sutton Coldfield.
Below is a copy of an e mail that I received from her :-
Tonight with Trevor McDonald



Monday 7th February, 2005 on ITV at 8pm special feature on mobile phone masts, not to be missed. A lot of work has gone into this, the production team have been fantastic, I have faith in them, hopefully it should be good.



I may be invited on GMTV Monday morning in order to promote the Trevor McDonald show and cover the mobile phone mast issue, will keep you posted.



Kind Regards

Eileen O’Connor
I urge you all to make an effort to watch this programme, as it will be very informative

[michele cryer]

Thanks for this Deecan...I will be taping Monday evening's progs, and will take the opportunity to watch this one!

[Guest]

Nelson Mast Refusal - Top Businessman never uses a Mobile phone

Mr. Latimer of Lima Engineering has (for some reason) been allowed by the Nelson leader another ad in the Letters section 2 of the Nelson leader stating "Why don't you answer my points?" It seems to be becoming a sort of 'flame' which the Leader is only seen to fanning.

It’s in the Letters page '2' of the Nelson leader (Fri 11th Feb). Just thought I'd let you know that señor Brian Latimer of Lima Engineering (yes how brave he's put a business address) has once again replied to the response regarding the community campaign against siting a telecommunications Mast on his Lima Engineering site in Nelson.

We now know the approximate figure Mr. Latimer would have stood to gain from siting the mast, this is approximately £15,000 per annum. On a 10 year term this becomes quite substantial and would benefit any small company (I assume it's small I've never heard of Lima).

Latimer's pathetic response is on the Letters page 2 (Friday 11th Nelson leader) if anyone fancies a laugh. It's a far cry from his initial "Mast protest appalling" Letter to the Leader earlier in January.

Essentially, his headline reads "Why don't you answer my points?"

I'm glad that the site and (moreso the owner) seems irate at the councils decision to refuse the siting since the ignorance of businesses towards residents continuous exposure to low-level radiation is beyond belief!

Latimer insists that protestors requesting petitions didn’t ask for permission to wander over somebody else’s land. The land in question 'wandered over' by residents is actually a public thoroughfare, it's the industrial buildings off the road/thoroughfare that are leased to the companies. It's a sad day when residents have to take it upon themselves to inform people working/living nearby of the potential dangers and eyesore a mast would be. That's the council’s job which obviously had not been carried out properly. Lack of notification was a primary concern to residents on this application.

Latimer then goes on about methane gas and then to state he does not own a mobile phone
(etc.. prattle prattle whine whine...)

I suggest no one "answers his (Latimers) points" since it seems that if he can't use a mobile phone he's hardly likely to take in the subject of low-level brain-frying ionised radiation from cellular RF masts that is YET to be proven safe.

*Ps. If anyone wants more info on this subject reply to this thread and I'll get back to ya.
If anyone wants to reply to Latimer in the Nelson leader do it before Friday 18th Feb. Personally, I think the guys an ar#ehole and it's just taking a while for it to sink in that he's lost a few quid, upset quite a few residents, and unknowingly perhaps saved
a few lives in the long-term.


Cheers, I’m away to make a shepherds pie...

[Deecan]

Thank you Guest for making your comments about the Walverden Mast proposal.
I do agree with all your points.
You seem to have some knowledge about the effects of non ionising radiation and I speak on behalf of TAM to invite you to join us and to give us the benefit of your experience. We need more members who can contribute to the cause, which is to try to protect peopla from this intrusive and uncalled for radiation entering our homes.
Please go to the link and join us or simply posy your reply on here.
Cheers,

[Mitch]

Thanks guest, yes I had seen Mr Latimer's latest. We are currently working on a response, and I suspect many responses will appear in this week's Friday Leader.

The poor man is about to self-combust. Really he continues to highlight his own ignorance on the subject, and to demonstrate his own greed and complete disregard for the concerns of the local community in Nelson.

I will post the letter we intend to submit later today probably, guest for your feedback and comments.

You can imagine how much money big business companies like Shell and Macdonalds are reaping in from placing Masts on their forecourts and restaurants. And now we see them appearing on the top of hospital buildings, there is one on top of the Maternity Ward at Burnley General hospital, and one on the Pendlebury Childrens Hospital in Manchester. Hospitals are looking for extra funds from Private businesses now. It's a shocking state of affairs, all condoned by central government - I would say again that this is symptomatic of private businesses' complete disregard for the health and welfare of the public - they are driven by profit. We must challenge these soon.

There will be a Together Against Masts Stand in Burnley Town Centre, opposite notorious Macdonalds I might add, near the Burnley Bandstand in the glass house kiosk on SATURDAY 5TH MARCH 2005, from 11am to 3pm. Lots of archives and information will be available, and information on where Masts are located in the Burnley and Pendle area.

All welcome, and Deecan will be there with his years of experience and technical knowledge on Masts - do come and join us Guest.

Best Mitch

[Mitch]

Submitted today to the Nelson Leader in Response to Brian Latimer's Letter in the Leader/11th February 2005

send your letters to the leader by email to:
[e-mail]


It seems that Mr. Latimer is getting desperate in his attempts to recover the income that he hopes to receive for allowing a phone mast on his land. Perhaps he would like to be honest and tell us just how much rental he would receive from allowing a mast on his property ? I would estimate that over the " initial " term of his 10 year contract the amount would run into a 6 figure sum. Not bad for simply having a mast close to his works.

Firstly he tries to isolate himself from the whole proceedings by saying that it was not him that applied for planning permission, it was H3G the operator. As if he was a completely innocent party in the proceedings. Let us not forget that H3G would not have put in an application if Mr.Latimer had not previously given his " approval " to the phone company himself. I would ask what research he had done himself into the potential adverse health effects resulting from this non ionising radiation? Apart from hundreds of independent scientific studies showing the danger, there is Professor Sir William Stewart, head of the Government sponsored National Radiological Protection Board, who only 2 months ago called for severe restrictions on children using mobile phones and to avoid placing phone masts in sensitive areas. Further, in December 2004, the results of a £10 million EU study was announced, which showed that the radiation from masts at the power currently being used caused damage to the DNA in living cells, some of it was permanent damage, causing the cells to mutate { exactly what occurs when cells are turning cancerous } and even worse this damage was passed on to the next generation. Yet Mr. Latimer refers to this as scaremongering when these things are discussed by concerned residents. Would he calm all our fears by proving to us that there is no basis for our concerns and that the technology is safe, as it is currently being used. Perhaps he is privy to information that the many clever Independent Scientists from all around the World have been unable to find .

He waffles on about the methane problem, which is certainly not the main issue here, as the evidence presented universally has nothing to do with the presence of methane. The evidence, taken in it's most generous form indicates that the technology cannot be accepted as safe and so a careful and precautionary approach must be followed.

As for nobody answering his points, I have reread his first letter and cannot find any points that require answering. However, If he would spell them out again, I would be pleased to debate the issue further. All I ask that he states them explicitly and also reciprocates by answering my points above.
Finally, I would ask Mr. Latimer not to be blinded by the thoughts of a large income and to accept that people have genuine concerns, which even if subsequently shown to be unfounded { although the evidence makes that hard to believe} their concerns are real and are causing stress now. This in itself can cause serious illness. The legislated Human Rights states that everyone has a right to a home unaffected by outside influences.

[michele cryer]

Great letter Mitch, hope it gets the sensible reply that it deserves!!

[Mitch]

Nothing in the Leader today. Umm, someone's had a word. Nice spread on Lord Greaves opening a nursery though, and guess what Gorden Prentice has had a visit from Robin Cook.

Yawn!

[michele cryer]

Hmph! Typical Nelson Leader response!!!

[Mitch]

15th March 2005 - submitted today to the Nelson Leader:

Response in support of Jackie Nike et al

I would like to express how moved I was by Jackie Nike and David Cliffe’s letter in the Leader last Friday, on behalf of their children and all the children in the Barrowford area. I would also like to send a message of support and full agreement of all the points made in this letter concerning fears over telecommunications masts in the area from WRAM (Walverden Residents Against Masts), and their affiliated group TAM (Together Against Masts), which now has over 4000 members.

It is becoming increasingly clear that local residents’ concerns over the health risks linked to Masts in many communities across the country are being ignored. The reason for this is clear. Local governments are continually being pushed into a corner by Central Government policy on Masts. Central Government have made legal commitments with the 5 mobile phone companies, Hutchison, 02, Vodafone, Orange and T-Mobile, who care nothing for public health and are motivated by pure profit, to roll out 1000's of the extra powerful 3G masts in the next two years , to add to the considerable number of 2G masts and the even more harmful TETRA masts. This Labour Government has received huge payouts from the phone companies in return. Sefton Council near Liverpool has taken seriously the concerns of local residents on Masts and continues to refuse planning permission for all masts, but they now face threats by central government that they will have their funding capped in areas not linked to Masts at all if they continue to refuse planning permission for Masts. Is this local democracy in action? Certainly not.

I do hope that Gordon Prentice will be present at the private members bill going to parliament on 18th March, or perhaps he also will ignore the concerns of his own local community on Masts. It is so important now for community groups fighting masts to come together on the issue. Hutchison will no doubt be coming back to Walverden shortly with another appeal to put up a 3G mast in the area, and they may be assisted by central government loopholes in planning legislation, and threats to cap funding in other areas if Masts are continually refused by local councils. This is nothing less than blackmail . My concern is not just for the health and well-being of my own community, but for that of communities across the country and I send my support to all fighting this issue. Together we are stronger.

Michelle Simmons
WRAM (Walverden Residents Against Masts/TAM – Together Against Masts)


In response to Jackie Nike et al's letter in the leader on the 11th March:

Letters week ending 11th Mar 2005
A risk to our children?
IF residents of Barrowford and parents of local schoolchildren are not yet aware of the "permitted development" which one of our local firms is planning, let me put them in the picture.

Standel Dawman is placing a mobile phone mast on the top of Albert Mill, just behind the White Bear, despite refusal to permit the development two years ago.
The firm were aware of local concerns then, but obviously they were biding their time to enter through the loophole which requires no local discussion or consultation. And here were we, thinking they were sympathising to the worries of local residents!
Why should people who own firms, force something such as this on to local people and then drive home to another area unaffected?
We are slightly dubious of the sympathy angle this time round, so therefore we need the help of Barrowford residents and parents of local school children or, in fact, any regular user of Barrowford Park or young socialite that spends sunny weekends sat outside the White Bear soaking up the rays (or should I say waves?)
Whether you use a mobile phone or not, this is not the issue Ð the sensible sitings of mobile phone masts is paramount to preserve our right to have control over our own health and that of our children. Many health risks are linked to masts ranging from headaches, sleep disturbances, fluctuations in blood pressure to hormone imbalances (to name but a few). The more disturbing and increasingly conclusive results of studies indicate that cancer (brought on by immune deficiencies) and leukaemia in children are a major cause for concern. The two local schools and the park are within the most dangerous zone. In one study, masts are recommended to be "at least 500m from inhabited property".
I have been brought up to fight for what I believe in, but never have I felt so powerless and totally saddened by something which directly affects my personal life. Myself and my partner are fighting for the health and possibly the lives of our beautiful children. We could move Ð why should we? Ð It's not a guarantee that another one won't rear its ugly head. We could do nothing Ð but after we've spent years enforcing healthy living, fresh air and laughter into their lives, why should we allow radiation waves caused by greed, to seep into their bones and go and ruin it all?
We are not without hope Ð there is a private members' bill going to Parliament this month, so if we come knocking on your door, please sign the petition and give your support. Better still, if you feel you want to help, please ring either 611754 or 692122.
P.S. If someone had told you a year ago that Worcestershire sauce was a potential killer, would you have believed them?
JACKIE NIKE AND DAVID CLIFFE ON BEHALF OF JASMINE MARLEY AND ALFIE AND ALL THE CHILDREN IN THE AREA

www.pendletoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=365&ArticleID=969182

[michele cryer]

Thanks again Mitch...I really hope that the campaign for the safe placement of Mobile Phone masts succeeds against the barriers that Central Govt. is placing on Local Govts.

Best wishes...Michele

[Deecan]

ELECTROSENSITIVITY

It has long been accepted that Electrosensitivity is an actual illness by many countries throughout the World. However, it has not been recognised in the UK, possibly because it would affect the way the Authorities control the roll out of mobile phone masts and also High Voltage power distribution. The latter has been connected with childhood leukaemia in the report, sponsored by the Ministry of Health, by Prof. Draper and his team from Oxford University, where a definite link has been established. This report submitted in 2001 has still not been published by the Government. Now the WHO { World Health Organisation} has confirmed at their Conference in October 2004 that, such a condition medically exists. They refer to it as EMF Hypersensitivity abbreviated to EHS.Symptoms listed include headache, fatigue, stress, sleep disturbances, skin symptoms like prickling, burning sensations and rashes, pain and ache in muscles and many other health problems. The significance of this acceptance is that it means some people, who have EHS, suffer when exposed to things like radiation from mobile phone masts and their lives are completely changed for the worse.
People suffering from EHS are growing in numbers and it has been established, that like an allergy, continual exposure to such radiation produces new cases of EHS.The potential for becoming sensitive to radiation is increasing and eventually the majority of our population could succumb to this debilitating condition. Children and old people are particularly susceptible initially, but it could affect everyone eventually. The immune system has been shown to be damaged and recent EU studies have shown DNA damage in living cells after exposure to microwave radiation as given off by mobile phone base stations.
A good analogy would be to compare the effects of this with the well known effects on certain people who are exposed to strobe lights in places like discos. Such people have epileptic fits as a result of strobe lights, which could result in death. Their only recourse is to be removed from the area and certainly to stay away from such lights. However, with phone masts the solution is not as straight forward for such masts are everywhere and their numbers are increasing daily. EHS sufferers only know of the presence of masts when they are affected by them. We should all be pressing for the introduction of safe power systems for mobile phones as proposed by independent scientists at Salzburg. Otherwise, in the words of Prof. Johansson of the Karlinska Institute in Sweden when addressing the Scottish Executive, we are potentially killing millions of people. Do you know if your child is electrosensitive ?. Are you prepared to take the risk ? Join Together Against Masts and have your say. The General Election is imminent and it is only this Government of all the UK political parties that support the way in which mobile phone technology is developing. They are the ones that provide the loopholes for the operators to erect their masts circumventing local democracy and people's wishes. To join us or to make a donation, please call 01282 771635
Tell your doctor about this new information

[Mitch]

A TAM (Together Against Masts) meeting is to be held tonight (Wednesday, 27th July) at

Padiham Town Hall, (through front entrance/straight up stairs to top, and room with double doors straight ahead).

Meeting commences 7.30pm. I'm going to this and will report back tomorrow on discussions.

Bestest Mitch

PS. All welcome if you'd like to come along

[michele cryer]

Thanks for the info Mitch...unfortunately I'm having a boozy nite in tonite, so canna make it...good luck and thanks for keeping all these campaigns going strong...will promise to try to make another meeting of this kind eventually!

[Mitch]

Burnley Express, Friday, 4th November 2005
www.burnleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=131&ArticleID=1243103

Join our fight against masts
- RECENTLY, an application for a Hutchinson 3G phone mast at Pike Hill was refused by Burnley Council's Development Control Committee following petitions with hundreds of signatures and more than 70 letters of objection.
In spite of this, Hutchinson appealed and it was upheld, so there will be a phone mast there. Now Vodafone has applied for a similar mast very close by, the same people are objecting. There are five phone companies and so they can expect applications for three more masts around there soon. Hutchinson stated last year that it will need at least 10 masts to give coverage for Burnley and that means there will be a minimum of 50 masts needed to give 3G coverage in Burnley.
The Government has given the operators 18 months to provide 90% coverage for the UK for 3G services. A financial penalty will be imposed for those that fail to achieve this target.
Take careful note, no district of Burnley will escape this.
The 3G system has a much shorter range than the original phone system and around three times as many masts will be needed and they need to be closer to the users, so it is inevitable these masts will have to be in residential areas.
On Tuesday, October 18th, I attended a meeting in Pike Hill overflowing with anxious residents. The system of applying for one mast at a time means a relatively small group object and their concerns are swept under the carpet, so as not to interrupt the constant flow of money into the Government's coffers (£18bn last year, representing 20% of the GDP).
After one success they move on to the next mast and another small campaign group and repeat the process. People in other regions take little interest in someone else's fight and don't become involved until they are faced with the same problem.
To achieve success, we must support each other. Combined there would be several thousand people in Burnley who would object to a mast being close to their home.
We need to join together in one voice and make our feelings and demands known. The guidelines and methods are all politically based. People who we have voted into office should be told that enough is enough and we should perhaps elect representatives who put the wishes and wellbeing of their electors first.
Why, you may ask, am I so concerned about this technology in its present state? Simply because it is having widespread adverse health effects on many, many people.
We are being fobbed off when we submit independent scientific evidence, by their claims this is not definitive proof or the evidence is anecdotal.
The level of proof they demand is almost impossible to provide. It is like saying, you have caught a cold, now prove exactly where you caught it.
Yet the evidence keeps coming in, including some from other governments, like Holland, China and even a £10m. study by the EU, which showed clearly DNA damage to living cells from exposure to exactly the same power and radiation given off by these phone masts.
This study also showed that damage was permanent and caused mutations, which continued after the radiation had been switched off. Had such evidence been presented regarding foodstuffs or drugs, they would have been off the shelves until proof had been established, yet here they continue with the relentless rollout awaiting their required "definitive" proof.
We intend to arrange a public meeting soon and hope our MP and council leader will be on the platform to answer your questions. Clearly, large numbers at such a meeting would give strong indications to our representatives that the public demand some big changes in the way masts can be placed wherever they choose.
If you want to join us phone now on 01282 771635.