Latitudes (1201) is a quarterly publication of the Association for Comprehensive NeuroTherapy (ACN). Every issue includes information on non-toxic approaches to autism, Tourette syndrome, learning disabilities and attention deficit disorder/hyperactivity. There is a story obtained by Sheila Rogers, editor of Latitudes which they believe has all the makings of a documentary. The following story gives detais of the kind of devastating impact that can occur by the erection of a cell phone mast. With kind permission from www.latitudes.org here is the rest of the story.
Meredith and her husband were dairy farmers on over 150 acres of rolling green land that had been passed down for generations. They had grown to love the simple lifestyle that came with hard work, fresh air, and farming in the Midwest. They and their four children enjoyed good health and happy days.
When the cell phone tower was erected twelve years ago they weren't too concerned, though they were certainly not pleased that it was just over the property line on the adjoining land and only 800 feet from their house. It was an eyesore, but they were assured it was perfectly safe. "It's like a 100-watt light bulb," the company often told people.
"We were na´ve," says Meredith. "Over the next few months, we watched as our herd that grazed near the tower became emaciated and agitated-a change from their normally fat and contented state. The whole herd developed rough coats. The vet was puzzled, but blood work produced no answers."
Meanwhile, within six months the parents noticed changes in their children. There were skin rashes-unusual, raised "hot spots." They had recurrent kidney infections. The youngest two kids became dramatically hyperactive, and the older ones complained of foggy thinking and concentration problems. Then sleep disturbances crept in. Meredith, in her early thirties, began to develop joint problems.
"Everyone's symptoms were worse," she explained, "on foggy or rainy days. I since learned this was because the moisture increases the electrical conductivity. There were times when my preschool child would literally spin in circles." One day she discovered that their tower had become the "hub" for the entire state. "We buried cows that winter," she recalls.
Searching for solutions and options, they tracked down a researcher at the Environmental Protection Agency, who gave her the first useful advice they'd had. He told her that as a government official he should reassure her that they were safe. But with his "citizen cap" on, he had to say that they should move immediately.
With hopes of returning one day, they sold the herd but had someone keep the heifers for them. Within two to three months of moving to an electrically clean area in upper Michigan, health problems began to subside. After a year, they all were feeling strong once more. The only problem was that their farm was unattended, they were out of money, and they desperately needed to farm again.
About this time, they spoke with new owners of the cell phone company. The staff expressed disdain for flagrant safety lapses of the previous tower owners. The family was assured that if they returned, everything would now be fine. Excited at the news, they went back to their farm.
It was not long before symptoms returned. The children lost weight and the girls began to lose hair. Meredith was pregnant but not gaining weight. That son was unfortunately born with anomalies-birth defects that fit no particular syndrome. Neighbors also had complaints; the suicide rate increased in town, and unusual seizures were reported.
Now, some calves were born with front legs shorter than the back and with deformed hooves; some had large tumors-one tumor was three feet in diameter and the calf could not be delivered alive, even with a C-section. And the tumors were not typical to the species.
They had been back for three years when a pediatrician saw the son's birth defects, heard the story, and told them to leave town. Why had they stayed so long? "We had to make a living. And somehow, when it's gradually happening, you're in denial-you don't see it for what it is," Meredith said.
They managed to buy a farm in a safe area and start anew. "My husband insisted we take the cows with us, and within three days they were chewing their cuds-something they hadn't done for years." The young boy, though, remains electrically sensitive and hyperactive. Meredith says that if he is within two and a half miles of a tower he develops flushed skin. Computer terminals and fluorescent lights in stores increase symptoms. He has food sensitivities, and damp weather continues to affect him.
And the land-what happened to the farm? Meredith sighs. "It just sits there. Empty. Selling the farm has not been considered. Should we let this happen to someone else?" End
This is the opinion of acknowledged world experts concerning these very special '100-watt light bulbs'.
Dr Neil Cherry - New Zealand
Dr Neil Cherry (1946 -2003) held the position of Associate Professor of Environmental Health at Lincoln University.  Dr Cherry's standing and credibility was confirmed on 1 January 2002 by the award of a Royal Honour of Officer of New Zealand Order of Merit (O.N.Z.M.). The citation for his award shows that it is for his services to Science, Education and Community, including his research and teaching work on Environmental Epidemiology and the health effects of electromagnetic radiation. Back in 1994 he helped a local primary school fight plans for a new cell mast to be installed next to the infant department of the school. He showed that the frequency of the cellphone radiation produced a half wavelength that match the child's size, therefore children were highly vulnerable for any possible health effects. He therefore recommended that the school declined the offer.
Since this time most of Professor Cherry's research had been focused on the health effects of electromagnetic fields and radiation. In helping local residents fight planning applications in court Dr Cherry was surprised to find how much published science there was to show that across the electromagnetic spectrum the ELF fields and RF/MW radiation damage the cellular DNA, alter cellular calcium ions, reduce melatonin, and altar many cellular functions. Radio frequency and Microwaves, including cell phone radiation, are genotoxic shown by many independent studies published since the first in 1959. Therefore they are carcinogenic. Microwaves also open the Blood Brain Barrier, letting natural and external brain damaging chemicals into the brain and CNS. Dr Cherry also discovered that epidemiological studies of exposed workers and the residents confirm, through classical public health assessment, that electromagnetic fields and radiation are a Ubiquitous Universal Genotoxic Carcinogen, causing increased rates of Cancer, Cardiac, Reproductive and Neurological health effects in exposed human populations, with a safe level of zero exposure.
Dr Neil Cherry wrote a 120 page review of 188 research papers and his verdict was 'The Safe Level of EMR is ZERO'.  This was announced by email to the EMF Guru, Roy Beavers, who ran the www.emfguru website, he wrote the following historic email, which I have included below:
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000
From: "Cherry, Neil J" < CHERRY@xxxxx.xxxx.ac.nz >
To: emfguru <firstname.lastname@example.org >
Subject: Safe level of EMR is ZERO
I am about to leave for Europe where I am presenting the results of my latest research into low level health effects of EMR as requested by representatives at the European Parliament and our very good friends in Salzburg City Council.
The conclusion of my research is that:
--Electromagnetic Radiation is damaging to Brains, Hearts, Embryos, Hormones and Cells.
It is therefore a threat to Intelligent Hearty Life.
--Electromagnetic radiation resonantly interacts with bodies and cells, Interfering with cell-to-cell communication, cell growth and regulation, and is damaging the genetic basis of life.
--Like other toxic substances that damage cells, EMR has a safe exposure level of ZERO. (through many dose response relationships from exposures from ELF, RF and MW)
Hence my recommended Target Public Exposure for significant risk reduction is 10 nanoWatt/sq cm. This can be accomplished by setting a maximum outdoor exposure at the boundary of properties of 0.1 microWatt/sq cm.
This will not be liked nor accepted by cell phone companies and many government and international authorities, such as ICNIRP and WHO (Dr Michael Repacholi for example). However, it is based on a large set of internationally published, peer-reviewed papers from a wide range of independent universities and research institutes. It also includes the results of studies funded by industry, e.g. Repacholi et al. (1997), Phillips et al. (1998).
--Another important conclusion: Cell phone radiation mimics the effects that we have found for EMR across the spectrum, in over 45 published studies showing adverse biological and human health effects specifically from cell phone radiation.
A cell phone against the head exposes the premier organ of the human body to serious interference with its processes and serious damage to its tissues and cells. The exposure levels on average are higher than military personnel who show highly significant cancer, cardiac and neurological effects for radio and radar exposures (Robinette et al. (1980) and Szmigielski (1996)).
Cell phones and cell sites are producing significant health effects right now but few direct studies are attempting to identify them. You only see what you look for. If nobody is looking then nobody will see anything.
I had a call from a resident yesterday who had developed severe arthritis in the period immediately following the installation of a cell site 50 m from his house. He is in a high exposure regime over 2 microwatt/sq cm. Burch et al. (1998) have shown that cell phone usage reduces melatonin. There are 14 studies showing that EMR reduced melatonin in people. I looked up Dr Russell Reiter's book (Reiter and Robinson (1995)) on melatonin. It lists several illnesses that result from reduced melatonin. The first (p8) is arthritis, then diabetes, cancer .....
A great deal of illness and death currently occurring in developed countries, can be associated with the progressively increased exposures to EMR, especially in the RF/MW range because this is much more biologically active and damaging than ELF fields, Bawin and Adey (1976), Vignati and Guiliani (1997). This is going to increase very significantly with the use of cell phones and the installation of cell sites.
My problem is that there is so much research that shows adverse biological and health effects, but there is a concerted campaign to ignore, discredit or attack the messengers. The studies are not generally known by authorities who trust [scientific] bodies that appear to be reliable but who deliberately mis-quote and mis-represent the published research. This continues to delay measures to protect public health by retaining the strongly mis-proven assumption of tissue heating being the only effect.
Warm Regards to you and all on the list.
Roy Beaver - The EMF Guru - United States
The EMF 'guru' Roy Beaver's biography on the website states:
'By 1993, Roy had reached the point of retirement from his "second career," the electrical industry -- and he retired from KAMO to his country home in Lebanon, Missouri, to engage himself more fully with the EMF issue..... His EMF-L Discussion List was first launched in October of 1995. By that time, he had begun to make it a practice to attend as many of the EMF scientific meetings as he could afford. He attended all but one of the EMF RAPID meetings, plus every one of the annual U.S. Government "Contractor" meetings from 1993 onward.
'At the time of his retirement from KAMO, he had already been listed by the Marquis publishers in their editions of Who's Who: Who's Who in the South and Southwest (1993). Beginning in 1995 and thereafter, he has been listed in all subsequent issues of Who's Who in America, Who's Who in the World, Who's Who in Science and Engineering, and Who's Who in Industry and Finance.
Beaver documents the rather remarkable admission by US EMF scientists:
"Now the public will know what the members of the
EMF research community have known for years"
The speaker who made the above statement was one of thirty or so scientists who were present at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) sponsored EMF/health effects research review project completed in Minneapolis, Minnesota in the U.S.A. There, the "working group," a panel of 30 scientists who had been selected by NIEHS to write the final EMF report, agreed to the final draft of a report summarizing more than five years of studies by literally hundreds of researchers worldwide. In the report, the panel voted 19-8 to identify EMF (power frequency electromagnetic fields) as a class 2B carcinogen.
The editor of MicroWave News (MWN) who was in attendance also heard the statement and recorded those words in the pages of MWN that summarised the five year, $45 million, EMF RAPID research project, as below:
"Now the public will know what the members of the EMF research community have known for years," commented Dr. Michael Marron of the Office of Naval Research in Arlington, VA. Marron is a member of the EMF Inter agency Advisory Committee, which must submit its own report on the EMF RAPID program to Congress. 
Roy Beavers, the EMFguru was present during that historic gathering as an "observer." and states;
'Clearly, the ubiquitous looming EMF health hazard is (within the lifetime of my "generation X" children) the most serious single environmental threat to public health and safety that has yet been identified..... All the scientific evidence of this scientific paradigm, the bio-effects of EMF which we have just BEGUN to comprehend, points toward two major conclusions which were NOT decided by the NIEHS panel that met in Minnesota. They were not even considered.
Yet it is manifestly apparent to "the insiders" that the results of the Minneapolis meeting portend the future acknowledgment -- perhaps SOON in the future -- of the following two additional bio-effects" realities:
(1) It is not the 60 Hz (power line) frequencies, alone, that constitute the health threat of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. The evidence of EMF research worldwide in many other wave-bands of the electromagnetic spectrum is clearly trying to tell us that ALL "EMF" signals (microwave, RF, etc., of whatever frequency) should be considered suspect!!! The Russians have known for more than thirty years....
(2) The Minneapolis verdict was the "easy," obvious verdict. (As Dr. Marron's statement implies.) Many, if not "most," of the scientists on that panel realize full well that the 'truly appropriate' judgment would have been to define the EMF health threat as a "2A" category carcinogen -- a "probable" carcinogen rather than the "possible" that was decided.
In June 2003 he wrote the last editorial on the EMFguru website and in tribute I would like to repeat the website mantra.
'It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness........'
Dr G J Hyland - United Kingdom
Dr Hyland is an Honorary Associate Fellow of the University of Warwick, UK, and a member of the International Institute of Biophysics, in Neuss-Holzheim, Germany, where he is involved in biophoton research. He has been particularly concerned with potential health hazards associated with non-thermal influences of the low intensity, pulsed microwave radiation used in GSM/TETRA telecommunications, and he has written various papers which include being published by The Lancet and the European Parliament. 
Hyland wrote the well cited report in February 2000 called Potential Adverse Health Impacts of Mobile Telephony: Memorandum. He writes:
'What is so appallingly scandalous from a regulatory point of view is that the majority of these symptoms have been known - from experience with radiation having certain features in common with that now used in mobile telephony - for over 25 years, but have been studiously ignored, presumably on account of the negative impact their revelation would undoubtedly have had on the market growth and development of mobile telephony products; it is interesting in this connection to note the following statement that appeared in a United States Defence Intelligence Agency Report on contemporary Soviet research into biological effects of low intensity microwave radiation, dating from as long ago as 1976:
…'If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavourable effects on industrial and military functions.'
'It is somewhat ironic that in recent years, the Russians - who were the first to discover the existence of frequency-specific, non-thermal bioeffects induced by microwave radiation (at intensities intermediate between those encountered when using a mobile phone hand-set, and those realised several hundred metres from a Base-station) and the associated possibility of provoking adverse health effects in humans - have relaxed somewhat their permitted exposure limits (which were originally 1000 times more stringent than those in the West), and are (together with China) currently being encouraged by the World Health Organisation (WHO) to participate in a global programme of 'harmonisation', the implementation of which would, of course, further facilitate market growth.'
Don Maisch - Australia
The Australian Don Maisch, also comments about the russian difference in standards and he raised the following points: 
'In Russia however a vastly different political, economic and social situation resulted paradoxically in giving their scientists far more democratic and academic freedom (and funding) than their Western counterparts in choosing the focus of their research efforts, without interference from vested interests. This has resulted in a Russian RF/MW exposure standard with a different viewpoint on what "protection" should mean in regards to ensuring people's health.
While thermal effects are accepted by both Western and Russian scientists, it was only the Russians that expanded their own research to include extensive studies with human workers that were exposed to non-thermal electromagnetic fields. The reasons why Eastern scientists had more freedom in this regard are as follows:
Now that East and West are talking about the standard setting process, it is only rational that the large body of Russian medical research into non-thermal biological effects should now be included in standard setting. Unfortunately however, it appears that the current attitude of ICNIRP is that the process of harmonisation means total acceptance of the existing ICNIRP guidelines (thermal effects only) without alteration.
- A Socialist philosophy about protecting the "worker".
- The military was exempt from the public/occupational standard and could go about its business unfettered by these limits. As such, Russian (USSR) research into developing a non-thermal standard that considered low level prolonged exposures was not seen as a possible threat to the military's developing and deploying new technology, the way it was in the U.S.A for instance. An example of this was the suppression of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 1990 report, "Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Electromagnetic Fields", which was a review of the scientific literature up to that date. A US Airforce paper on the EPA report stated: "If published, the (EPA) report will contribute to public anxiety and have serious impacts on capabilities and costs of airforce programs."
- The absence of large capitalist private corporations who were investing in microwave technology purely for future corporate profit, and would view research into low level hazards as, itself, a risk for "the bottom line".
Now that the large body of Russian literature is becoming available to the West, which convincingly shows that the ICNIRP voluntary standards do not provide adequate protection for workers and the public, how will our standard setting bodies handle that?
If it turns out that ICNIRP still insists that only high level thermal effects can be considered in standard setting then the question must be raised: just who does ICNIRP provide protection for, anyway!?! [end of exerpts]
Don Maisch also has some very frank words to say about how scientific research can be manipulated.
'If you look behind most battles over major public-health issues in the last few decades - over asbestos, pesticides, herbicides, dioxins, PCBs, cigarettes and general environmental pollution - the questions always resolve down to one of the public health activists insisting on government regulators taking a "precautionary approach", and the industries concerned lobbying for the strict application of "scientific proof" before restrictive measures are imposed.
'The corporations know well that 'scientific proof' is virtually impossible until the damage has been done, and with life-long cumulative damage, this will take another generation. They also know that the "strict application of sound science" will keep them off the hook for years to come.
'In the cell phone area, the argument is much the same. With long-term diseases such as brain cancer, it is clearly impossible to establish any form of 'scientific proof' which can be sustained in a court "beyond all reasonable doubt", in the course of just a few years. Therefore, sensible regulators tend to take into account the potential for wide-spread community damage to health and happiness. They then make precautionary judgments accordingly, based on the best scientific evidence available at the time, even though some of these findings may be disputable.
'Countering this precautionary approach is the increasing power of corporations over politicians, and the skills developed by corporate lobbyists, polling companies, and public relations consultants in manipulating public opinion. These groups are now being aided and abetted by scientists who are sometimes overtly corrupt, but more likely to just be corrupted by the system of research funding and control.
'Or as Joseph Hotchkiss of Cornell University so succinctly put it:
"A host of techniques exist for manipulating research protocols to produce studies whose conclusions fit their sponsor's predetermined interests. These techniques include adjusting the time of a study (so that toxic effects do not have time to emerge), subtle manipulations of target and control groups or dosage levels, and subjective interpretations of complex data. Often such methods stop short of outright fraud, but lead to predictable results. Usually associations that sponsor research have a fairly good idea what the outcome will be, or they won't fund it."
'For the estimated 700 million mobile phone users today, the assurances of safety by the cell phone industry are indefensible when you look at the science, and the obvious industry attempts to influence it. In the opinion of a growing section of the world's legal fraternity, the industry's attempts to "pervert the course of science" will be their undoing, exactly as it happened to the tobacco corporations.'[end of exerpts]
The comment that is often made about the various regulatory bodies who supposedly supervise public interests is - 'The fox is guarding the hen house!'
Dr Ross Adey - United States
Dr Ross Adey (1922- 2004) was one of the world's most respected and senior research scientists in his field. As the chair of a committee of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) investigating ELF health effects, Adey made waves by recommending strong action to curb public exposures. He endorsed a 2 mG exposure standard for 50/60 Hz EMFs, but this was opposed and the NCRP refused to release his report. He wrote:
"The laboratory evidence for non-thermal effects of both ELF [power frequency] and RF/microwave fields now constitutes a major body of scientific literature in peer-reviewed journals. It is my personal view that to continue to ignore this work in the course of standard setting is irresponsible to the point of being a public scandal."
In conclusion: So what we have is an ideological battle between an increasing number of well qualified experts, calling for a precautionary approach to safeguard our children's health, versus the corporate might of a billion dollar industry with concerns based solely on maximising corporate profits at the possible expense of our children's future wellbeing. The outcome of this conflict may not be known for many years, until today's young mobile phone users are well into their adulthood. By then, if the warnings of health hazards prove to be true, irreversible damage to the health of many of these people will have been done.
However Ross Adey in his research studies discovered something interesting and it looks like the EMF Paradox at work again. He discovered that exposure to a digital cell signal could create a protective effect -that is, exposed mice developed fewer tumors.  Motorola, which paid for Adey's experiments, repudiated this finding and soon afterwards stopped supporting his lab, which was then forced to close down. That is strange! There is a hint from Microwave News that maybe this has been duplicated by a husband and wife team the Bartsches, sponsored by Deutch Telecom.  There was some excitement with four follow up studies to replicate the findings and a brief announcement made on the WHO website. However, for some unknown reason this information has being suppressed. Adey was a top scientist in his field and we know other scientists as discussed in this book have shown they have had success with phase conjugation of signal frequencies. It maybe that by proving that a particular phase of a signal can have a beneficial effect you have to also admit that opposite has a detrimental effect and that would be a major problem.
Susan Joy RennisonMay 2005
Rogers, S The Dark Side of Wireless Technology - Latitudes
Neil Cherry Health Consulting
Dr. Cherry: Safe Level of EMR is ZERO
EMFguru - Our Mission
G J Hyland
Hyland GJ, Potential Adverse Health Impacts of Mobile Telephony Memorandum Feb 2000
East-West "Blue World" War (Maisch)
Microwave News Vol XX. No 6 Nov/Dec 2000
Rogers, S Children and mobile phone use: Is there a health risk? The case for extra precautions: Don Maisch, EMFacts Consultancy Quote made to editor Sheila Rogers
The Politics of Information: Public Health vs. Private Control - Microwave News
If you want to know more about the new phenomena of Space Weather , Earth
changes and the impact on human consciousness,
then you can obtain a copy of
Tuning the Diamonds: Electromagnetism & Spiritual Evolution