In a very professional manner, Kent Chamberlin, Ph.D. Professor and Chair, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of New Hampshire, made a lengthy, well thought out presentation at a Town of Lenox (Massachusetts) Board of Health Remote Meeting, August 19, to educate them on cell tower research. But, within the presentation, he made many opinionated, negative statements about the effectiveness of FCC regulation and said the wireless industry is willing to risk the health of the populace in order to achieve profits.
Chamberlin was on the Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology, which issued a final report last November. He discussed the findings of the commission, which met over a period of a year and heard from nine experts in the field relating to cell phone radiation and health effects.
The FCC did not offer any input into the New Hampshire study, according to Chamberlin, even after repeated efforts by the commission to include the agency. He cast doubt on the FCC’s regulation of RF radiation by quoting an article published by Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University, that said the industry has a “stranglehold” on the agency.
“So what’s going on at the FCC is they have a revolving door where people from industry will go in and serve for FCC and then come out and work for the telecommunications industry,” he said. “That’s why the FCC is not protecting us. You’re likely to hear from people who are going to quote the FCC RFR limits. ‘Oh, we’re fine because we’re within FCC guidelines.’ That doesn’t mean squat.”
Chamberlin addressed an antenna that a wireless company has proposed on the Curtis building in downtown Lenox, which he said would place people who live within 1,060 feet at risk of health problems due to RF radiation, based on what he concluded from the Brazilian study (mentioned below).
“Why do cell companies want you to believe that cell phone radiation is harmless? Well, the reason is, if it’s harmless, they could go ahead with the antenna, right here on the Curtis building turn up the power so that they get the desired five to 20 mile coverage area,” Chamberlin said. “What I see happening is it seems that the cell companies are willing to jeopardize the health of people just to save some money.”
In the New Hampshire commission’s year-long investigation into the health effects of RF radiation, Chamberlin said the only expert that said cell phone radiation was not a problem was a representative of the telecommunications industry. “The finding of the commission was that, you don’t want to hear this but, cell phone radiation is indeed harmful,” he said. “None of us want to hear this. We’re at a time when it seems like everything can kill us.”
The New Hampshire commission’s report included a 10-year study in Brazil that he said showed elevated mortality rates within 1,060 feet of 864 cell towers, and he said there were many other studies that came to the same conclusion. He claimed that the wireless industry’s influence through ad dollars keeps that information out of the press.
“You think that if something like this were true, you’d be seeing it plastered on newspapers all over the place,” Chamberlin said. “But please consider who are some of the main advertisers for many news outlets. It’s the telecommunications industry. So people are aware of this but they’re not going to publish it because they don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them.”
By J. Sharpe Smith, Inside Towers Technology Editor
Reader Interactions