Objection to mast - best way to object a Vodafone contractor proposing to erect a mast

[Geoff Winkless]

Not "obviously" at all.

Geoff

[Huge]

No I haven't. Only if you can't count the number of '>'s.

[Al Reynolds]

Make sure you get a detailed picture of the current housing market in your (wider) area. Once the mast is up, compare house values close to the mast with those nowhere near the mast. Even though there is no *known* danger from these masts, public hysteria *will* make your house harder to sell if you're anywhere nearby. When it does, jointly sue the council and mobile phone company for the material loss they have caused you.

There are documented cases of councils paying out to whole streets where traffic calming measures had a negative effect on house prices. No reference at all was made to the safety "benefit" or otherwise of the traffic calming measures - it was simply a case of proving that they had resulted in lower market values for the houses in that street.

Of course this won't work for you if you are *genuinely* worried about mobile phone/mast safety, and aren't just getting narked about a nasty-looking mast going up in your back yard.

Al

PS Regarding public hysteria - never underestimate it. I lived on a new build for about three years where there was an electricity pylon in the corner of the close. Someone noticed about a year after the houses were built that there was a higher than average incidence of cancer in the close. It might even have been a statistically significant level. Everyone ignored the fact that: (a) these people had mostly been suffering before they moved in (b) the types of cancer all varied. Nonetheless, the local paper ran a scare story.

Later, when they the same people who had raised the issue in the first place (to try and get the pylon moved) tried to sell their houses, they got upset about the fact that their houses were harder to sell because of the pylon! They also conveniently forgot that those plots were cheaper when first sold precisely because they had a big lump of ugly metal behind their garden fence.

[Peter Corlett]

sPoNiX wrote: [...]

Counterexample: Paracetamol, when taken in an appropriately high dose, will cause liver damage and death. However, if you take *too much* of it, it's actually safer because you will throw it up.

[John Rumm]

There are similar hypothesis regarding possible ill effects of working close to CRT monitors for the same reason. The realisation that sitting next to an object that is going to suck lots of pre existing crap out of the air might mean you are exposed to a much higher concentration of said pre existing crap.

[Bob Eager]

Women can.

[Bob Eager]

So where are your peer-reviewed papers published?

[Tony Bryer]

A year or two back those at a local ward meeting listened to all the health problems a local had experienced since a mast was erected opposite her house.

It was then revealed that said mast had never been used.

[Dave]

This was discredited several years ago and the original hypothesis was withdrawn. The theory was that if you lived on Granite there was a theoretical possibility that the ESF would attract dust particles which would then be expelled with Radon (from the Granite) progeny when the VDU was next switched on. The detailed sums showed that, even if Radon loaded dust was present, the mean drift velocity would be so VERY low that the hypothesised "cloud" would not be expelled.

[Dave]

sPoNiX wrote: ... snipped

... snipped

What is the source for this factual statement?

[David]

Churches were looking at an income of 5k pa but this has been vetoed by the church commissioners as its possible a link will be proven between the masts and health problems in the future and they will then be liable.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Radio mics - transmitting continuously - on both VHF and UHF have been worn as body packs for long periods of time by actors etc for perhaps 40 years. And I've not heard of any problems.

Of course the type of modulation and frequency might well influence things, but 'RF' as such at low powers doesn't appear to be a problem.

[sPoNiX]

Or use an angle grinder.

sPoNiX

[sPoNiX]

Depends how close said mast is to said nimby.

sPoNiX

[sPoNiX]

So you are suggesting that something in a high concentration is automatically safer than the same something in a low concentration?

I hope you are never allowed near a packet of Aspirin in that case..

sPoNiX

[hairydog]

Right, so you think brushing past a 1,000w antenna is the same as being tens of metres from a 30w antenna?

Would you equate being trapped twenty feet under water with being outdoors on a misty day?

[hairydog]

Let's examine that assertion in some detail:

He said: "If you're going to go against all of the scientific evidence so far you're going to need a bit more credibility than "I know stuff, you'll find out soon enough"."

Your reply does not address that statement at all.

You talk of "*some* scientific evidence" (which implies that only a little) "to suggest" (which explicitly excludes proof) "that there is a danger".

Without doubt, there is a danger. People could be killed by a falling mast. The Emley Moor mast collapse avoided killing anyone by mere chance. Aircraft could crash into phone masts, people could walk into them.

The issue is not whether there is any risk, but it is whether there is a credible and significant risk. I suggest that there is not. The vast body of scientific research suggests that there is not. You assert something else. Let's see your evidence.

Frankly, I don't believe you have any evidence. I don't believe anyone has. I don't believe there is any, and I don't believe there is a danger.

I am deeply worried about health issues related to many other consumer product, but mobile phone bases is not one of them.

Why not have a campaign to stop shops within five miles selling cigarettes? They are very definitely extremely harmful. Getting rid of smoking would have a vastly bigger impact on health in your street.

[Peter Corlett]

sPoNiX wrote: [...]

Clearly you have not yet read, or are deliberately ignoring my post, Message-Id: about this. (Except that I used paracetamol rather than asprin in my example.)

[sPoNiX]

All it proves is RF *can* cause tissue damage, something that was refuted in a previous post.

[Mark Carver]

Yea, that's its heating effect. I use RF heating every night with my Microwave oven.

I could stand 6 feet away from a conventional hot plate for years on end, and suffer no ill effects, however if I put my face 6mm from it...........