Re: [IRCA] Reposting from www.qrz.com
--- Patrick Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scott, I have not heard of a study either per se, but I have always wondered. If the 1/2 watt cel phone is an issue, there will be millions who come down with cancer in the future. I have heard pro and con on that subject too. 1/2 watt is not much, but of course it is next to your head. Then there is the cordless phone too. Not the wattage, but still RF net to your head. I guess you could lay awake nights and worry about anything and everything. One could. Any studies I have seen over the recent years pretty much debunk the cell phone issue Russ Edmunds Blue Bell, PA ( 360' ASL ) [15 mi NNW of Philadelphia] 40:08:45N; 75:16:04W, Grid FN20id [EMAIL PROTECTED] FM: Yamaha T-80 Onkyo T-450RDS w/ APS9B @15' AM: Hammarlund HQ-150 4' FET air core loop Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
[IRCA] Reposting from www.qrz.com
RADIO HEALTH: RADIO AND LEUKEMIA LINK HALTS TOWERS A county official in Washington state has ruled that two AM towers cant be built until possible health dangers of electromagnetic energy are analyzed. This is an action that could have far ranging implications for anyone wanting to put in a new radio installation of any kind in that state. The owners of KRKO A-M in Everett, Washington wants to add two towers to four that have been approved for a site south of Snohomish. The Snohomish County official making the decision to delay the project cited a recent study published by The American Journal of Epidemiology. It found that children who live within a certain distance of A-M radio antenna structures are twice as likely to develop leukemia. (RW) Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] Reposting from www.qrz.com
Joe Miller, KJ8O wrote: RADIO HEALTH: RADIO AND LEUKEMIA LINK HALTS TOWERS A county official in Washington state has ruled that two AM towers can’t be built until possible health dangers of electromagnetic energy are analyzed. This is an action that could have far ranging implications for anyone wanting to put in a new radio installation of any kind in that state. The owners of KRKO A-M in Everett, Washington wants to add two towers to four that have been approved for a site south of Snohomish. The Snohomish County official making the decision to delay the project cited a recent study published by The American Journal of Epidemiology. It found that children who live within a certain distance of A-M radio antenna structures are twice as likely to develop leukemia. (RW) The study in question, which actually came out of South Korea, is, shall we say, questionable. While it did observe an increase, that increase was within the study's own margin of error - and even at that, there were many other environmental factors that weren't controlled for in the study. (As any of us who chase tower sites know all too well, they're rarely located in the nicer sections of town, and there are usually a lot of other potential health problems associated with the areas in which towers are typically sited.) That said, the study certainly provides yet another useful hook on which NIMBYesque neighbors can hang their opposition to tower construction. (In the case of KRKO, which has now been fighting for well over a decade, at a legal cost that's now surely well into the seven figures, the neighbors simply don't want towers of any kind impinging on their view in their fairly rural area east of Everett.) s ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] Reposting from www.qrz.com
Scott, I have known a lot of engineers through the years that worked around a lot of high power AM, FM, TV transmitters and quite a few passed on with some kind of cancer, but also a lot of other people die of cancer too. But I have always wondered, being around a lot of high RF, how healthy is it? 73, Patrick Patrick Martin KAVT Reception Manager ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] Reposting from www.qrz.com
As I understand it, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 gave the FCC sole jurisdiction over r.f. exposure matters. In other words, local officials cannot legally consider health issues when deciding whether to approve radio facilities. The FCC established r.f. exposure requirements soon after the 1996 Telecomm Act, and all licensees are required to make sure the public is not exposed to electromagnetic fields that exceed the legal limits. That said, it's possible for a local board to respond to someone's exposure concerns based on fear, uncertainty, and doubt, but I would expect the courts to rule in the station's favor when and if this comes up for appeal (assuming the station can show it will stay within the legal r.f. exposure limitations). The county would need to show evidence that the FCC's r.f. exposure limits are inadequate. There have been similar legal arguments in recent years, particularly with respect to cell phone use, but so far the courts have ruled against them due to lack of evidence. Bruce Scott Fybush wrote: Joe Miller, KJ8O wrote: RADIO HEALTH: RADIO AND LEUKEMIA LINK HALTS TOWERS A county official in Washington state has ruled that two AM towers can’t be built until possible health dangers of electromagnetic energy are analyzed. This is an action that could have far ranging implications for anyone wanting to put in a new radio installation of any kind in that state. The owners of KRKO A-M in Everett, Washington wants to add two towers to four that have been approved for a site south of Snohomish. The Snohomish County official making the decision to delay the project cited a recent study published by The American Journal of Epidemiology. It found that children who live within a certain distance of A-M radio antenna structures are twice as likely to develop leukemia. (RW) The study in question, which actually came out of South Korea, is, shall we say, questionable. While it did observe an increase, that increase was within the study's own margin of error - and even at that, there were many other environmental factors that weren't controlled for in the study. (As any of us who chase tower sites know all too well, they're rarely located in the nicer sections of town, and there are usually a lot of other potential health problems associated with the areas in which towers are typically sited.) That said, the study certainly provides yet another useful hook on which NIMBYesque neighbors can hang their opposition to tower construction. (In the case of KRKO, which has now been fighting for well over a decade, at a legal cost that's now surely well into the seven figures, the neighbors simply don't want towers of any kind impinging on their view in their fairly rural area east of Everett.) s ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] Reposting from www.qrz.com
Patrick Martin wrote: Scott, I have known a lot of engineers through the years that worked around a lot of high power AM, FM, TV transmitters and quite a few passed on with some kind of cancer, but also a lot of other people die of cancer too. But I have always wondered, being around a lot of high RF, how healthy is it? That's a tough question to answer. I don't think there's ever been a study that's looked specifically at RF engineers and cancer. It would be hard to do scientifically - what do you use as a control group? Anecdotally, I haven't seen much evidence that long-term exposure to RF correlates to an increased cancer risk. I've known some engineers who have died young, but plenty who've lived very long, very healthy lives, too. Today's engineers certainly get less high-level RF exposure than engineers did a generation or two ago. It used to be common to work on AM towers that were energized, or near FM/TV antennas that were energized. Current RF exposure standards have made those practices obsolete. There's more attention paid nowadays to ground-level exposure, too. For myself, I'm much more cautious in close proximity to VHF and especially UHF and microwave than I am in the near field of MW stations. I suspect most people - most engineers, even - end up getting much more ionizing radiation exposure from cell phones held up close to their ears (or on belt clips) than they ever do from the much higher powered, but much more distant, broadcast antennas. s ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
