This is a compilation of three items, one from 2001, the second from 2003 and the third today's 'The Liberal' newspaper.



Subject: Precautionary Principle

Date: Fri 29 Jun 2001 12:56:36 -0300

From: "Michael P. Milburn"

I thought the list would be interested in yesterday's ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada on pesticides. Pesticides
like the microwaves from cell phone systems are potentially hazardous. As with microwaves there are uncertainties about the extent of the risk uncertainties that industry has used to reduce regulatory action at the federal level. Of course there are too many cases of federal politicians being influenced more by industry than the citizens that elect them. A Canadian town Hudson just outside of Montreal banned pesticides some 10 years ago. The industry challenged the law in court arguing that local communities can't enact laws more stringent than federal regulations. Sound familiar! The case made it all the way to the Supreme Court. Yesterday the court ruled that communities have the right to protect their citizens even against presumed hazards irrespective of federal regulations. And it specifically upheld the precautionary principle. That's a positive trend in favor of democracy and public health and rare on this continent. Certainly relevant to the city of Toronto's attempt to limit rf/microwave exposure.


Mike Mike Milburn PhD

Author of Electromagnetic FIElds and Your Health 

See court ruling:




The Bell Shareholders report from 2003 !!!


Media reports have suggested that some radio frequency emissions from cell phones may be linked to medical conditions, such as cancer. In addition, some interest groups have requested investigations into claims that digital transmissions from handsets used with digital wireless technologies pose health concerns and cause interference with hearing aids and other medical devices.

The findings of these kinds of studies could lead to government regulation, which could have a material and negative effect on our business. Actual or perceived health risks of wireless communications devices could result in fewer new network subscribers, lower network usage per subscriber, higher churn rates, product liability lawsuits or less outside financing being available to the wireless communications industry. Any of these would have a negative effect on us and other wireless service providers."

David Livingstone





Bell won't answer call as residents slam tower to be built 'near kids'


Richmond Hill

Mar 25, 2008 06:30 AM

Effort to delay construction falls on deaf ears: mayor
By: Caroline Grech

Despite protests and threats to change service providers, construction is set to start on a Bell cellphone tower today at the corner of Bathurst Street and Elgin Mills Road.

The move comes amid protests from nearby residents who say placing a tower so close to a residential neighbourhood puts their health and safety at risk.

Richmond Hill Mayor Dave Barrow sent notice to residents Friday and said despite appeals from the town, there’s nothing that can be done to stop the tower, which will go up on the southeast corner of the intersection.

Mr. Barrow asked Bell to delay construction until an alternate location could be found.

“We’ve tried. We’ve written the letters,” Mr. Barrow said, adding Bell feels they’ve done their due diligence.

Rhonda Pomerantz-Kula, a member of PACT of Richmond Hill (precautionary approach to cellular transmissions) said the company has not done enough.

“I don’t believe they need it. They haven’t shared what the other alternatives are,” Ms Pomerantz-Kula said. “We’re not going to just roll over and go away. Bell doesn’t care about setting up towers near kids.”

Part of the problem with the location is a nursery school close by, Ms Pomerantz-Kula said.

Critics of cell towers claim the electromagnetic fields produced are a health threat. However cellphone companies argue their towers give off electromagnetic fields that are within government safety guidelines.

The group of about 350 residents, is concerned about five proposed towers in Richmond Hill.

The Bell tower was approved by Richmond Hill council in April 2007. Ms Pomerantz-Kula admitted that approval made stopping the tower an uphill battle.

She said she and her group want to work with the town to find better places for towers.

Meanwhile, the company has been flooded with letters from angry residents threatening to quit using Bell.

“After all this controversy, I am very disappointed in your attitude and the way you completely dismiss us,” resident Luca Balestrieri wrote. “I will take my business and that of everyone I know to another company for disregarding the safety of children!”

Another resident, Gilda Rovan, blamed Ottawa for the problems.

“If there’s anybody to blame it’s the federal government. They have no business allowing Bell to come into this community. They should be protecting us, not big corporations,” Ms Rovan said.

While some residents have taken their business to other companies in protest, Bell isn’t the only company with a proposal to build a tower at that intersection.

Rogers is also planning a tower for the northeast corner.

In November a public consultation held at the Elgin West Community Centre drew hundreds of residents, all voicing opposition to any towers being built.

Councillors are expected to vote on the construction of the Rogers tower May 12.

However, it is Industry Canada that has the final say over whether or not a cellphone tower will be built.

“Municipalities need to have more responsibility than to just look at them (towers) as just buildings,” Ms Pomerantz-Kula said.