Education needed on implications of cell masts

Daniel Baum, Noordhoek

Thank you for your article regarding the by-law amendment that will allow the spread of cell masts and towers in residential areas, (“By-law amended,” Echo, November 14).

I suspect that this is the forerunner for bringing in 5G antennas into South Africa, as they will need to be spaced every 100 to 200m or so.

As of October this year, 252 scientists from 43 countries have now signed the appeal to the UN, petitioning for greater protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure, given the extreme densification of 4G and coming 5G technologies (emfscientist.org).

In your article you cite the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), who have claimed authority on the subject. However, as the appeal highlights, their guidelines seem completely outdated, and the World Health Organisation (WHO) has its own struggles in gaining clarity on this subject.

It would be wonderful if the media could start quoting independent research and science when getting academic perspectives. Clearly there is a wealth of research behind these 252 petitioners, that is conveniently being ignored by our governing authorities.

And then there is the real human experience of those affected by these technologies which should hold the real weight. People need to be educated on the cumulative and long-term affects (as well as the many direct health implications experienced by thousands around the world). That we have not consented to the increase in cell masts and towers and the launch of 5G satellites, shows up what type of global “democracy” we live in.