After
months of attempting to meet with the local mayor regarding their
concerns over radiation emissions from telephone masts, which have
been erected next to their homes and schools, protestors in the
Algarve town of Tavira were finally granted an audience with town
hall officials on April 16th.
But it had taken a
petition signed by over 1,000 residents, and several public protests,
before Mayor Macaroe Correia agreed to allow two of his representatives
to meet with leaders of the protest groups. It is understood that
prominent coverage given to the protestors concerns by The
Portugal News during the past two months has also increased pressure
on the mayor to, at last confront the problem.
One of the protestors,
Teresa Drago, who attended the town hall meeting on April 16th told
The Portugal News that the mayors representatives were surprisingly
more than sympathetic to local residents fear of health problems
posed by the masts. Of particular concern are three masts erected
next to a primary school and kindergarten.
Teresa said that the
town hall officials were fully supportive of the protestors and
agreed that everything should be done to protect the health of residents
and their children. According to Teresa the officials also guaranteed
that they would do everything possible to protect the public from
the interests of the giant network providers responsible
for erecting the masts.
Local government officials
have arranged to meet with representatives of the network providers
to explore the possibility of re-locating all telephone masts in
and around Tavira to a distance of 500 metres from residential properties
and schools. Some other European countries have already imposed
restrictions on masts being built within 650 metres of urban areas.
A public meeting called by protesters for April 23rd has been postponed
until after the outcome of the discussions between the town hall
and network providers is known.
If Taviras town
hall officials succeed in persuading the mobile phone companies
to agree to the 500 metre limit it will certainly set a precedent
for the rest of the Algarve, and no doubt the whole of Portugal.
But the question still being asked, is how network providers such
as Optimus and TMN have been allowed to erect thousands of masts
throughout Portugal without official planning permission?
The Portugal News
has received many thank-you emails and letters for putting readers,
whose homes have been blighted by telephone masts, in touch with
experts on the health dangers of radiation emissions. Dr. David
Best of London, an independent radiation consultant to BBC TV, has
been able to advise many of our readers on the ramifications of
living close to masts. So too has Mr. Les Wilson, Managing Director
of Microshield Industries, a UK company specialising in anti-radiation
devices.
|
One of the
leaders of a protest group has told The Portugal News that assurances
given by the Tavira City Hall, that it would do everything possible
to protect residents from the harmful effects of telephone masts'
radiation emissions, have turned out to be without foundation.
Teresa Drago said that, during a meeting with
local government officials, both she and her colleagues were told
that the Town Hall agreed wholeheartedly about their concerns regarding
radiation emissions from five telephone masts erected close to schools
and a housing development. The officials confirmed that they had
arranged a meeting with the telephone operators and that the protestors
could expect to see the masts removed in the near future. As a result
of these assurances the protestors cancelled a demonstration meeting
scheduled for April 23rd.
However, the meeting between City Hall officials
and the telephone operators appears to have done nothing to allay
the fears of local residents living under the shadows of the masts.
Mrs. Drago said that no action had been taken to remove any of them.
All that has happened is that two of the telephone operators. Optimus
and Vodafone, have sent letters to the protest groups stating that
radiation emissions from the masts are well within international
safety limits and do not pose a health threat.
The letters state that 1,600 studies worldwide
prove that mobile phone masts are perfectly safe. They also confirm
that the five masts in question have been tested and shown to be
well within the World Health Organisation's (WHO) safety guidelines.
According to one of the letters, radiation emissions from telephone
masts are less dangerous than those from hair dryers, TV or microwave
ovens. The May 2000 UK Government Stewart Report is also referred
to as giving a clean bill of health to cell phones and telephone
masts. Teresa Drago has sent a 17-page reply refuting the claims
made by the operators.
The Portugal News has discussed the claims made
in the letters with leading experts on the health effects of cell
phone radiation. Les Wilson, managing director of London based Microshield
Industries, said that the Stewart Report called for safety exclusion
zones to be erected around telephone masts and also advised against
children using cell phones - points ignored by Vodafone.
Professor George Carlo of Washington DC, USA,
pointed out that the 1,600 studies mentioned in one of the letters
were no doubt carried out several years ago and are now out of date
compared to more recent studies, which prove that cell phones and
masts are health hazards. The same applies to the WHO's guidelines.
He added that many of these studies were sponsored by the cell phone
industry - hardly a platform for impartiality. In the early 1990's
the Professor was fired by his US mobile phone sponsors after he
published a report stating that radiation emissions from cell phones
were a serious health danger.
Teresa Drago and her fellow protestors are determined
to continue their fight to have the masts removed. A public meeting
held in Tavira City Hall on May 22nd again called upon the Mayor,
Mac rio Correia, to protect residents by forcing the telephone operators
to remove the masts. They repeated requests for him to explain why
the masts were allowed to be erected without the necessary local
planning permission - a question he has failed to answer on numerous
occasions.
|