Subject: Legal action initiated against cell-phones in U.K..... Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 095537 -0500 (CDT) From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org> To: emfguru@hotmail.com -------------------------------------------------- Here is an important recent press release from Roger, in the U.K. 'Press folks' ... please at least take note ... even if your editor won't let you report on it...... I am dedicating this one to my (deceased) Congressional friend -- Mike Synar...... [guru] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 08:11:57 -0500 (CDT) From: "Roy L. Beavers"To: rbeavers@mail.llion.org Subject: Legal action initiated against cell-phones....... At the Cwmbran Magistrates Court, South Wales, today (5 May 1998) a summons was issued under section 10 of the UK Consumer Protection Act, 1987 for Roger Coghill to bring a private criminal action against The Telephone Shop UK Ltd., a retail distributor of Orange and Motorola mobile phones. His action claims that the distributors failed to affix labels to their handsets warning of possible health risks to users from prolonged conversations. Coghill presented scientific evidence to the Court that there could be a health risk from using mobile phones excessively. "The mobile phone is the most radiative consumer appliance yet invented", he told the media, "yet in use we normally hold it close to the brain, arguably the most sensitive organ of our body, for undetermined periods. These radiations have been shown in lab studies to cause doubled lymphoma in mice, breaks in DNA, loosening of the blood-brain barrier, cataracts, loss of memory, and lowered levels of a brain hormone, melatonin, vital for protection against cancer. "Large scale research programmes in several countries are already trying to find the extent of the health risk, but these will take up to five years to get the answers. Meanwhile it makes sense to adopt a policy of prudent avoidance, and warning labels will help the public awareness of the possible hazards. anyone using a mobile phone for more than 20 minutes at a time needs their head examined. In the UK the National Radiation Protection Board (NRPB) advises Government and industry on radiation risks, but no longer has any scientists except one looking at the non-ionizing part of the spectrum, basing its recommendations on other scientists' research and an Advisory Group. Last week the International Committee on Non Ionizing Radiation protection (ICNIRP) announced guidelines similar to those of the European body CENELEC, some five times more strict than those of the UK. In a recent authoritative work on Mobile Communications Safety (Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp26-27) contributors pointed out that the radiations of some mobile phones actually exceed guidelines based only on thermal considerations, whilst increasing scientific evidence points to adverse bio-effects at levels far below these. Coghill confessed astonishment that the NRPB guidelines were now the most lax in the whole world, and that the British Government, which has powers to insist on warning labels being affixed, has not acted quickly in the public interest. From none a few years ago there are now 8 million mobile phone users in the UK, he pointed out, and probably up to 10 percent of them habitually use their handset for over 20 minutes at a time. "These 800,000 people are probably the ones at most risk: we looked at the way mobile phone coverage has spread across Britain, and were shocked to find that it was followed by regional sharp increases in lymphoma", he claimed. "In East Anglia where coverage came early there is an above average lymphoma incidence since the mid 1980s, whereas in Wales and Scotland, which are still mountainous and valley areas where coverage is difficult, lymphomas are still comparatively low. It makes sense against this background to limit calls to a few minutes, but the networks are encouraging contracts offering unlimited phone use at certain times". Coghill called for the puny non-ionizing research efforts of NRPB to be replaced immediately by a new research body with a =A35 million annual budget, funded by a levy on the massively profitable power and communications utilities, and truly independent of any vested interest. "The mobile phone industry was supposed to have a $25 million health effects research budget, but has not been doing proper research, and spent most of this money on on PR and flashy offices, and is still getting away with murder, he argued, contrasting it with the drugs=20 industry where millions are spent ensuring the safety of pharmaceuticals before they reach the public". "The NRPB apparently now only have one in-house biologist looking at the entire non-ionizing spectrum, whereas powerlines, TV and radio, radar, domestic electric appliances, computers and all the new technology of the late twentieth century could be affecting 100 percent of industrialized communities. This is clearly inadequate". Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html