School children and nearby residents will be exposed to continuous radiation levels unlawful in several countries (but not the U.S.) from a new T-Mobile cell tower installed across the street from Taper Elementary School in San Pedro, according to this detailed radio frequency emissions analysis (with maps showing radiation levels by color – check them out!).
The T-Mobile tower appeared without warning, and local residents and parents are now fighting to have it removed. Citizens successfully petitioned the LAUSD in December to adopt a resolution banning cell towers within 200 feet of a school campus.
From the RF Analysis:
The US limit was derived from decades-old studies evaluating the tolerable heating impact on human tissue (comparable to the effect of a microwave oven heating food). This limit does not consider other poorly understood effects such as neurological and immunological disturbances, and cancer incidence. In fact, Russian and Chinese medical studies document harmful health effects from RF radiation at levels far below the US limit. These health effects include headaches, fatigue, irritability, sleep disorders, and dizziness. These studies, along with others, have led countries to impose a much lower exposure limit than that imposed in the US.
Countries/jurisdictions that impose a 0.01 mW/cm2 limit for uncontrolled exposure (100 times lower than the US limit):
* Russia – (regulatory)
* China – (regulatory)
* Italy – (regulatory)
* Switzerland – (regulatory)
* Poland – (regulatory)
* City of Paris, France – (cooperative agreement)
* City of Toronto, Canada – (cooperative agreement)
The analysis proposes two alternate sites, with only lower-level emissions reaching businesses or residents, that could provide equivalent or superior wireless coverage, and concludes that T-Mobile chose the site adjacent to the school solely because of the bottom line and a desire to avoid public input:
It is clear the location selection was not determined by safety concerns as safer alternate sites are available. It was not determined by coverage needs as alternate sites are just as good or better. It appears the site location was driven entirely by T-Mobile’s bottom line.