You seem to be concentrating too much on the instrument (cell phones) rather than the villain (EMR) in the Telecommunications fractured fairy tale of “We Is The Good Guys”. Leave us not forget wireless Internet EMR which affects a much larger geographic area in the family home and has vastly more air time to cause fatalities and injuries.

IT IS ABSURDLY SIMPLE to display and record EMR’s death dealing capability, eg take Per Sagabeck head designer of Ericcson phones into an EMR free area with a team of impartial doctors and scientific instruments (make sure there is no EMR neutralising device in range from anyone on behalf of vested interests to shonk the results). Remove him out of his EMR proof suit, observe him and when nothing happens turn on some EMR near him and watch what happens when it shuts down his central nervous system – ask the doctors if he is faking it! Or do the same with your author Arthur Firstenbirg and watch his vital signs fade to black. ‘PROOF POSITIVE ‘ INSIDE 15 MINUTES – all the other crap you quote about waiting years for a result to manifest is precisely that, if it applies to two it applies to heaps more. Oh yes two large black wagons might be useful if you can’t revive them.

And what about the 500 pound gorilla sitting quietly in the corner? Half or more of adult America has tinnitus – nominate one researcher with the brains to have researched EMR-caused hearing damage which can be shown in the time it takes to full range audiogram a person guaranteed not to have been near EMR for a month, expose him/her to an hour of wireless Internet and re-audiogram. A simple Excel graph will show the damage by the variations up (hyperacusis) or down (incipient tinnitus). ‘PROOF POSITIVE’ INSIDE TWO HOURS! I would have thought your ATA should have been your largest and therefore most valuable ally in the war against EMR-caused human damage.

Doh! If IQs are measured in single digits then that is where you would find the majority of researchers who can’t figure out such a simple procedure like mine above. Ditto most of the writers who simply regurgitate researchers’ points of view without any active input into helping the said cerebrally challenged researchers.

I clicked on the http, and the home page of Mast-Victims.org came up; then I clicked on “News” at the left, then on “View News by Country.” Not surprisingly, the UK, followed by the USA, then Germany are the three countries reporting the most stories. I clicked on the USA and read several of the stories.

I wonder how an individual person initiates an inquiry into whether mast towers are located near the person’s home, or are planned to be located there?

The “lifestyle” issue is directly related to the environmental and personal safety issues. “Lifestyle” is brought up mainly because of those two aspects of The Issue of Cell Phones. For example, although there are benefits to having cell phones in emergencies…the runaway use/abuse of cell phones (which is what the article is primarily focused on) necessitates the cell towers which endanger ALL citizens w or w/o a cell phone. Again, unless the “lifestyle” which demands cell phones be not only used but dominant/exclusively used eventually are questioned more seriously by the powers that be and the public (which will have to change their lifestyle attitudinally to “question”)…cell phones will “take over” more than ever…and –as per my comment #1 above– it will become impossible to do any studies whatsoever in the future. Not that they’re necessary in the sense that enough damning info is already in vis-a-vis personal and public health issues. Upon request I can give readers a list of well-known individuals whose lifestyles with cell phones succumbed to cancer very likely as a consequence of…not questioning their habits. — Marcelle

[1] Cell phones as a safety hazard

[2] Cell phones as an environmental hazard

[3] Cell phones as a lifestyle “hazard”

I agree with Ms. Cendrars about the issue of safety. We need accurate information to assess cell phone safety.

I also agree that cell phone are fast becoming an environmental hazard as cell phone users are encouraged to upgrade. This the same problem with the computers upgrade cycle and especially with now trend to the new flat panel monitors and the disposal of the old CRT computer monitors. However I have a day job and requirement in my day job forces me to keep up with the latest technology. However I’ve notice activists are becoming technology savvy which means they too are buying computers and cell phones.

I disagree however with the lifestyle hazard. I think cell phones are excellent technology and many “middle class” parents love giving their kids cell phone so they can stay in touch. I have a cell phone and gave up my land line because it was cheaper and I can carry my cell phone with me. So for me it is not a “habit” but in my case a condition of “employment”. However I unlike my colleagues am still using the same cell phone over the past four years and haven’t bought into the upgrade hype. I use my cell phone only to make and receive phone calls. I don’t text message or play video games or watch movies on my cell. I reserved that activity for my laptop and home computer.

While this issue may be disconcerting, overall, I don’t see this as a pressing issue to organize around.

http://www.mast-victims.org/

Also, there a matter of how to dispose of them:

‘Mountain of discarded mobiles grows at ‘frightening’ rate
By Nic Fildes
Published: 24 December 2007
Snazzy new mobile phones like the iPhone and other must-have electronic gadgets, such as the latest laptops and iPod models, will fill many stockings this Christmas. But disposing of the older devices will not be at the forefront of most people’s minds.

Around 11,000 tons of unused phones already sit dormant in drawers across the UK, and that figure is likely to rise this Christmas as people upgrade to better devices. Factoring in old laptops, games consoles and portable music players, the environmental implications of celebrating Christmas with a new digital toy start to look ominous, as most of the older electronic products will end up in landfill sites, leaking dangerous chemicals into the earth.

While reusing the devices either by passing them on to friends or selling it is the best solution, recycling the gadget is the next best thing. Companies such as the Body Shop and mobile phone operators such as Orange have been offering to recycle handsets for years, but UK consumers are still much more likely to bin their old phone as soon as they have transferred their numbers.

Johan Thomsen, a manager at Green Mobile, argued: “The problem today is that people upgrade their mobile phones every year and only a small percentage of these phones are disposed of safely.” The situation is ” frightening”, he said.

etc
http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3280480.ece

As Grandpa Elliott said when the boys brought home the shiny new ‘27 Studebaker: “That thing is an Instrument of The Devil”.

By allowing cell phones, cell towers and their first cousins to become all-pervasive, omnipresent in our lives…a setting is established whereby NO ONE will be able to participate in a study in the future in a control group. Specifically, there simply won’t be anyone left (for a Group B) who can be juxstaposed with those affected by electromagnetic gizmos. EVERYONE will be so impacted by the Monster Syndrome that we won’t be able to contrast groups. NO STUDIES will be possible…to establish “the truth” about cell phones (beyond what’s already on the books). — Happy Holiday from MC