The Harmful effects of Electromagnetic radiation with reference to children

There is consensus among researchers that children's brains are more vulnerable to cell phone radiation than those of adults. Reasons for caution are: 1) Children's skulls are softer, and therefore provide less resistance to radiation. 2) Children's heads are smaller, placing a larger portion of the brain closer to the source of radiation. 3) Children's brains are in rapid development, and therefore more susceptible to neurological interference from radio frequency (RF) radiation.

According to the above-captioned study, preadolescent children are more vulnerable to microwave radiation because of their thinner skulls; their still developing nervous systems; their increased levels of cell division; and their less robust immune systems In his study entitled ‘How Exposure to Mobile Phone Base- Station Signals Can Adversely Affect Humans’, Dr Hyland explains why children are more vulnerable.

The Stewart Report explains the effect of mobile phone radiation on children.  The signal was strongest between 50 metres and 200 metres from the mast;  A one year old could absorb around double the radio frequency (RF) radiation, and a five year old around 60%, more than an adult; and  Children have a longer time in which to accumulate exposure over the course of their lives, and a longer time for any delayed effects of exposure to develop. Sir William Stewart reports that:

Dr. Om Ghandi (University of Utah) conducted studies showing how radiation penetrates the head of a child much deeper than that of an adults. The pictures show below speak for themselves

Dr George Carlo, a noted scientist and researcher in the field of cell phone radiation, made the following comment “The skulls of young children are the most vulnerable to the risk of radiation. The radiation plume that emanates from a cell phone antenna penetrates much deeper into the heads of children than adults, and these children are more susceptible to genetic damage”

EU communication on the Precautionary Principle (EU, 2000) ‏ The precautionary principle applies where scientific evidence is insufficient, inconclusive or uncertain and preliminary scientific evaluation indicates that there are reasonable grounds for concern that the potentially dangerous effects on the environment, human, animal or plant health may be inconsistent with the high level of protection chosen by the EU.

Adopting the Precautionary Principle

April 2009 – EU says mobile phone masts need to be distanced from schools & hospitals Antennas, mobile phone masts and other electromagnetic emitting devices should be set within a specific distance from schools and health institutions, according to a report adopted by the European Parliament. Europe’s top environmental watchdog group, European Environment Agency(EEA ), calls for immediate action to reduce exposure to mobile phone masts. EEA suggests action to reduce exposure immediately to vulnerable groups such as children. Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe Doc May 2011 The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment On April 11, 2011, a committee of the Council of Europe unanimously adopted a resolution calling for immediate action to protect the public from the harmful effects of cell phones, WiFi, baby monitors, and other wireless technologies. One must respect the precautionary principle and revise the current threshold values; waiting for high levels of scientific and clinical proof can lead to very high health and economic costs, as was the case in the past with asbestos, leaded petrol and tobacco New Russian Recommendations Against Cell Phone Use By Children May 19, 2011 The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (RNCNIRP) has issued a resolution, published April 2011, addressing the urgent problem of cell phone use by children. The document cites studies showing that since 2000 the rate of nervous system disorders among 15 to 17 year olds has increased by 85%, epilepsy has increased by 36%, mental retardation has increased by 11%, and blood and immune disorders have increased by 82%. In children less than 14 years old nervous system disorders have increased by 58%, and blood and immune disorders have increased by 64%. Seletun Scientific Statement in The statement, called The Seletun Scientific Statement, was written based on a large and growing body of science showing biological effects. Scientists say governments should take decisive action now to protect biological function as well as the health of future generations.

Approximately 50mtrs

From the Policy side the Local Plan states that  The proliferation of businesses and other non residential uses in the Residential Priority Areas can have a serious impact on their particular character and amenity, and the location of such uses should be stringently controlled. MEPA has prioritised these areas for protective policy actions.  The Kortin Area is a Residential Priority Area and the Antennas are a non residential use.

From the Policy side the Structure Plan states that Telecommunications Equipment Conscious of Government's policy to encourage modern telecommunications, but at the same time acknowledging the negative visual impact that telecommunications antennas and dishes normally have, the Planning Authority will seek to prevent the adverse visual impact of all such apparatus. Policy BEN 2 Development will not normally be permitted if, in the opinion of the Planning Authority, it is incompatible with the good urban design, natural heritage, and environmental characteristics of existing or planned adjacent uses, and is unlikely to maintain the good visual integrity of the area in which it is located. There will be a presumption against development which does not generally observe the design guidelines issued by the Planning Authority for built-up areas Policy BEN 13 The Planning Authority will not normally grant permission for the installation of more than one telecommunications antenna or dish where a shared system is possible. Such antennas and dishes are not to be conspicuously located, should be of the smallest feasible size, of a colour that blends with their background, and screened from public view where appropriate. Wherever possible all individual property installations will be hidden from public view, either at the rear of the property, on the roof below the highest part of the roof, or in a special enclosure.

Thank you for your attention