Object to the erection of an 18.5m mobile mast and bulky cabinets in the Old Chiswick Conservation Area

System Reference: PA/2021/4816 Planning Reference: 00306/OPP58/COM1


I would like to take this opportunity of objecting to the planning application. I am aware that planers may have their hands tied in so much as they have been directed by government that they may not take into account the long-term negative effects to the health of the populations living near masts, who are therefore bathed in non ionising electromagentic radiation emitted from the masts. However, I take it as my public duty to present some basic information to them so that it can not be said in future that planners were unaware of the long-term effects on the public of their decisions.

For Reference:

Available on the following link is a copy of the “2020-Non-Ionising-Radiation-Consensus-Statement” prepared and signed up to by many people in the medical, scientific and public community from many countries.

https://phiremedical.org/2020-nir-consensus-statement-read/

My own statements:

Statement 1 – Non ionising Electromagnetic Radiation emanating from phone masts does have biological effect.

Statement 2 – The signs of the biological effect are many and varied

Statement 3 – The effects on humans vary between positive and useful to inconsequential to devastating to potentially lethal (cancer)

Statement 4 – Broadcasts from Phone Masts are forced upon people, they travel through buildings, so there is no escape from them. So unlike other dangerous substances the public can not avoid them. Here are two simple examples that show how unreasonable this is:
Smoking causes cancer – but smoke and smokers can be avoided.
Talcum powder (also on the WHO list of “ Category 2: probable causes of cancer“ could cause ovarian cancer – but only when applied to female genitalia over many years. Applying talc is a voluntary act so it could be avoided easily. Recognition of its dangers has lead to changes in formulation to mitigate the potential negative effects.

Statement 5 – The “Precautionary Principle” should be applied, and the building of this mast should be stopped until it has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the broadcasts from it will actually be “SAFE”

Useful References and Links to Peer Reviewed Studies

Thousands of good quality, peer reviewed, scientific papers going back many many years show the negative effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (Broadcast Radio Waves).

Dr Erica Mallery Blythe (UK)

This is a link to a very personal story from an English emergency and trauma doctor - Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe - giving some of her own experience of becoming sensitive to electro magnetic radiation (broadcasts from phone masts, mobiles and other wifi devices)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gisvfVeRpr0

Phire Medical (.org) is an excelent resource run by many extremely well qualified and informed Medical Doctors and Scientists including Dr Erica-Mallery Blythe.  It provides information backed up by very many peer reveiwed scientific studies.

World Health Organisation, Electromagnetic Radiation as a cause of Cancer

This is a statement from the Phire Medical site explaining the World Health Organisation categorising of Electromagnetic Radiation as a “Probable Cause of Cancer” along with the research that may soon lead it to re-classify it to being a “Group 1 Known Cause of Cancer” – links to the pertinent research papers are provided on the Phire Medical site.

https://phiremedical.org/world-health-organisation-iarc-and-cancer/

“Cancer risk noted from human epidemiological research corroborated by largest new animal studies:

In 2011, the World Health Organisation (WHO) via the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as Group 2B ‘Possibly carcinogenic to humans’.

Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM), an associated rapidly progressive fatal brain cancer and acoustic neuroma, satisfy the Hill criteria for causality from RFR exposure based on human epidemiological studies.

Human epidemiological evidence continued to accumulate

In 2018 the largest animal study so far, published, from the highly credible US National Toxicology Program (NTP), declared the evidence for carcinogenesis ‘clear’, putting pressure on IARC to reassess urgently and elevate RFR to Group 1 ‘Known Human Carcinogen’.

Furthermore, the large-scale Ramazzini Institute study which used far field radiation designed to emulate base station type radiation was published shortly afterwards and independently confirmed promotion of carcinogenesis in cells of glial derivation.

Legal authorities continue to validate the causal link between RFR and tumours. The incidence of these kinds of brain tumours are rising in the UK, Netherlands, Australia and USA.” 

Reference studies to back up eash of the above statements are available through the PhireMedical link above.