Misinformation about the radiation from mobile towers
Gerard Delaney
Last year,
a small group of Saliganvkars created awareness in the Lourdes
Convent school hall about the
alleged dangers of the radiation from Mobile towers by showing a
PP presentation of the so called expert Prof. Girish Kumar. The
same presentation was used again for a much bigger group of
villagers in Gladstone Ribeiro Sa's house and as a result the
construction of the mobile tower by Dmello Telepower Pvt Ltd in
Saligao was forced to stop.
When 6 of the leaders had met in my (Gerard Delaney's) house
after the Lourdes convent program, I had clearly explained to
them how this Prof. Girish Kumar was using his position to
create fear in the minds of the public about the radiation and
thereby helping his daughter's business of selling meters to
measure radiation and shields for it. I had even explained that
the average
frequency of light is one million times greater than that of microwave
radiation. Hence according to the well established laws of
Physics, light has energy greater than that of microwave
radiation by one million. Thus it is ridiculous to be afraid of
microwave radiation and not of visible light radiation which is
one million times stronger! However, what transcribed during
the meeting, was never released to the general public by the
leaders of the agitation.
Now a special panel of 13 members set up by the DoT in keeping
with the Allahabad High Court's orders, has exposed the misdeeds
of the Professor and affirmed that there is no danger to the
health from the radiations emitted by mobile towers. Read about
this at:
Deccan Herald dated 25th of February 2014
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/388471/radiation-fears-mobile-towers-unfounded.html
Rejecting the contention of
electrical engineering professor Girish Kumar, the 13-member
panel said Kumar repeatedly red-flagged these concern in the
media because of his family's commercial interest in companies
involved in manufacturing radiation-shielding products.
Kumar's daughter Neha Kumar sells radiation-shielding products
through her company NESA Radiation Solutions Pvt Ltd.
The Indian Express; Feb 25 2014
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/iit-prof-hyped-cell-radiation-daughter-sold-protective-shields/
A
committee set up by the department of telecommunications has
raised a red flag over the ethical conduct of an IIT-Bombay
professor for blowing out of proportion the effects of mobile
phone tower radiation on humans and on the other hand
promoting his family’s business of products that claim to
reduce the impact of such radiation.
“The
committee observed that his daughter, Neha Kumar, is selling
radiation shielding solutions through her company NESA
Radiation Solutions Private Ltd. On one hand, he is spreading
misinformation and creating misconceptions and unfounded
apprehensions in the mind of the public by sensationalizing
and blowing out of proportion the effects of EMF radiation,
and on the other hand, he is promoting his family’s business
in related products (which do not even follow any national or
international standards), thus throwing professional ethics to
the winds,” the report said.
...so long as EMF radiation power levels in the vicinity of base stations of cell phone towers are below the prescribed limits, there should not be any cause of concern for adverse thermal health effects on human beings living close them,” the committee said in its report.
Albert Desouza
--
Saligao-Net is at http://groups.google.com/group/saligao-net
To post to this group, send email to salig...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe email saligao-net...@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Saligao-Net" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to saligao-net...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
dilip dacruz
Gerrard's email should serve to remind us all once again that the earth is round, a few billion years old and that it revolves round the sun. It should also remind us that analytical thought and a willingness to change based on the evidence is the only way forwards for mankind. Science doesn't have all the answers and that it often itself changes as we acquire more knowledge, but that's no reason to revert to primitive reactionary thought.
Ironically, one could argue that it was a scientist, albeit a corrupt one, that caused all the problems with the tower. That's another story.....
I continue to struggle with my mobile when in Arrarim.
cruzmi...@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 20:23:46 +0530
From: delaney...@gmail.com
To: salig...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [SALIGAONET] Misinformation about the radiation from mobile towers
Ian da Costa
Brig. (Retd) Ian da Costa
Just out: Diary of an Infantryman
http://www.scribd.com/doc/193091039/Dairy-of-an-Infantryman-Book-details
Ashley Delaney
When this message was sent on goanet, Electrical engineer Prof Girish Kumar replied to my dad and the mail (see trail below) however Dr Santosh Helekar (google search throws up this)
Santosh A. Helekar, M.D., Ph.D.
Director, Songbird
Neurophysiology Laboratory
Member, Speech and
Language Center
Department of Neurology
Methodist Neurological Institute
I hope this dispels the unfounded fear from people once and for all.
kind regards
Ashley
-------- Original Message --------
| Subject: | Re: cell tower radiation hazards - technical references |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, 16 Mar 2014 09:05:35 -0700 (PDT) |
| From: | Santosh Helekar <chimb...@yahoo.com> |
| Reply-To: | Santosh Helekar <chimb...@yahoo.com> |
| To: | Prof. Girish Kumar <gku...@ee.iitb.ac.in> |
| CC: | delaney...@gmail.com <delaney...@gmail.com>, goa...@lists.goanet.org <goa...@lists.goanet.org>, Stephen Dias <steve....@gmail.com> |
Dear Prof. Girish Kumar, I read your report and the list of references. I have many problems with them. But rather than list all of these problems I will just point out the three most fundamental ones. If one cannot satisfactorily address the latter to start with then it is pointless to even consider this any further, because they essentially kill the entire case that you have presented in your advocacy report. The first of these problems is related to what Gerard has already said but goes much deeper, and actually uses your own argument regarding power densities against your claims. You have calculated that the power density of cell phone tower radiation one meter from the tower is 79.6 Watts per square meter. Assuming that the tower is 15 meters tall, from your calculation the power density of this radiation on the ground should be 9.54 Watts per square meter. You claim that these power densities are too high to be safe for humans, other animals and trees. You say that this is the case because at these power densities these electromagnetic waves heat up the water molecules in the tissues like a microwave oven, and in turn, cause all the various short term and long term effects such as brain damage, infertility, depression, cancer, heart problems, breathing problems, death, and so on. Here is your exact quote on this mechanism: QUOTE When a human body is exposed to the electromagnetic radiation, it absorbs radiation, because human body consists of 70% liquid. It is similar to that of cooking in the microwave oven where the water in the food content is heated first. UNQUOTE As you know, sunlight is also an electromagnetic radiation – in fact, with photons of much higher energy than cell phone tower radiation, as the physicist Gerard has already pointed out. It turns out that the power density of sunlight on the ground on an average during day time is 1120 Watts per square meter. This amount is 117 times more than the power density of cell phone tower radiation on the ground at the foot of the tower. Indeed, it is 14 times more than the tower radiation that one would be exposed to if one climbs up the tower, and perches within 1 meter from the antenna. And please note that sunlight of a given amount, especially in the infrared range which penetrates deeper into tissues, is absorbed by matter and causes heating of its molecules to a much greater extent than cell phone radiation of the same amount. Here is a diagram which illustrates this fact: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod4.html#c1 About 54% of the sunlight is infrared light with power density on the ground of 605 Watts per square meter, 63 times greater that the power density of cell phone tower radiation at its base. Now, I am sure you will agree with me that sunlight can heat water molecules by exactly the same mechanism that cell phone tower radiation does. Indeed, as I have pointed out above infrared light does this much better than the latter radiation. If you keep a glass of water exposed to sunlight you will find that it will take about 10 minutes for the temperature of the water to rise by about 2 degrees Celsius. According to the above power density values (and even ignoring the fact that infrared light is much better at heating), to do this with cell phone tower radiation alone, for a glass of water that is kept at the base of a cell phone tower only at night for 8 hours when it is completely dark, it will take 147 nights or 1176 hours in darkness. Therefore, if heating of water molecules in any part of the body, or for that matter, heating of any other kind of molecules, is responsible for all the bad effects of cell phone tower radiation, then sunlight should produce them more than 7000 times faster. As a matter of fact, the situation is even worse. As you may know, it is well-established that ultraviolet light causes cancer of the skin (and metastatic cancer of deeper tissues because of that) and many other deleterious effects by a well understood physical and biological mechanism. About 3% of the sunlight that hits the ground is ultraviolet light. This amounts to a power density of 33 Watts per square meter. This is 3.5 times more than the power density of cell phone tower radiation at the foot of the tower. In other words, we are being bombarded by particles of a known carcinogen on every square meter of most of the earth’s surface at a dose that is more than 3 times greater than cell phone tower radiation. This gets me to my second problem with your report. All the claims regarding bad effects of cell phone radiation that you make are from some selected studies in cell cultures, whole animals and people. I checked some of these study papers randomly to see if they were done in complete darkness, and with ultraviolet shields. Not a single one of them states that this was the case, and it is obvious that all of them would have to be done either in sunlight or artificial light. So how can we be sure that a cancer was caused by 0.0003 Watts per square meter of cell phone tower radiation, and not by some small daily fluctuations of 1120 Watts per square meter of sunlight or of a 60 Watts light bulb? Why can they not be caused by the 33 Watts per square meter ultraviolet component or 605 Watts per square meter infrared component of sunlight? Indeed, if it is really true that more people who lived on the top floor of a building got cancer compared to those on the ground floor then it is much more likely that this happened because the former were exposed to more sunlight on the top floor than on the ground floor, depending on how many trees there were around the building and how much shade they provided to people on the bottom floors. Of course, this assumes that slightly heating the water in the tissues is a plausible mechanism for causing cancer in the first place. This leads us to the third problem. If the heating of body tissues was the cause of cancer and all the other serious problems that you have listed then daily physical exercise would have been carcinogenic, and would have killed people from all those serious effects that are attributed to cell phones and towers by you. This is so because even normal daily physical activities can generate up to 21 Watts per kilogram of heat in a 70 kilogram human body, or a power density of 800 Watts per square meter of body tissue. This is 84 times more than the power density of cell phone tower radiation at the base of the tower. I am sure you understand how serious a blow this, in and of itself, is to the main argument presented in your report. While I am not confident that there is any way to explain away or disregard all of these fatal flaws, I would love to find out if you can do it. Cheers, Santosh > On Friday, March 14, 2014 7:46 AM, Santosh Helekar <chimb...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Dear Prof. Girish Kumar, > > Thanks for sending me your advocacy reports. Assuming you have not yet done so, > I encourage you to submit them for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific > journal. So the real experts in the vast range of highly technical fields > covered by these reports can critically evaluate them, and offer their comments, > as they do for any original scientific research paper. But as for me, I will > read your reports, and get back to you with my comments and questions, if > necessary. > > As you know, unlike politics, activism and law, in science people weigh the > entire body of research on any subject, and especially, the quality of all of > that research on all sides. Scientists evaluate both positive and negative > findings, and draw definitive conclusions only when the evidence unequivocally > points in one clear direction. Therefore, if research papers are cherry picked > only to support a preconceived opinion on one side then that task is of no > scientific value. That is why I asked you to refer me to peer-reviewed research > paper(s) that "unequivocally" supported your claims regarding > biological effects and the exact physical and biological mechanism by which > these effects occur. I have not seen any research paper of this type in the > literature. For this reason, and because of the fact that all epidemiological > studies have shown no significant health effects of cell phone or cell phone > tower radiations alone, no public health organization or > regulatory agency in the world has made any definitive statement supporting your > claims. But I am happy to evaluate any information that you can provide, and I > will try to offer my comments on your reports. > > Cheers, > > Santosh > > > > >> On Friday, March 14, 2014 12:00 AM, Prof. Girish Kumar > <gku...@ee.iitb.ac.in> wrote: >> > Dear Santosh, >> >> Thanks for your following email. Good to know that you are a >> neuroscientist and also noted that all others are well educated >> people. >> >> I have attached my report on cell tower radiation, which was submitted >> to Secretary, DOT in Dec. 2010, it contained nearly 200 scientific and >> technical papers. >> >> I have also attached Bio-Initiative Report conclusions and RF color >> chart, which gives details of various health hazards. You can download >> complete Bio-Initiative Report 2012 (1479 pages long) from >> http://www.bioinitiative.org/ >> The report gives references of 3800 scientific and technical papers >> with a summary spread over several chapters. >> >> Regarding my daughter's company "NESA Radiation Solutions Pvt. >> Ltd.", >> it is known to cell operators and DOT officials since its inception >> in Nov. 2011. Please see my report of Dec. 2010 and also in all my >> presentations, I always emphasize that better radiation norms should >> be adopted and transmitted power should be reduced. If transmitted power >> is reduced then who needs shielding solutions? >> >> With regards. >> >> ********************************************************************** >> Girish Kumar >> Professor, Electrical Engineering Department >> I.I.T. Bombay, Powai, Mumbai - 400076, INDIA >> Tel. - (022) 2576 7436, Fax - (022) 2572 3707 >> email- gku...@ee.iitb.ac.in, prof....@gmail.com >> Blog - http://profgirishkumar.blogspot.in/ >> **********************************************************************
-- Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and probably doesn't contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject to legal or Ashley related privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, (although you may find that hard to believe), you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several Commonwealth Acts of Ashley. If you have received this communication in error please notify The Man Ashley immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
