I FEEL I must take issue with some statements made by Dick Eberlie in Mobile Mast Should Pose No Risk? (Letters, September 16).

He explained we are surrounded by (electromagnetic) radiation and, to quote, ?we come to no harm from it?. With cancer levels at an all time high in the Western world, we cannot assume that any of our environmental pollutions are harmless. Neither can we test to find out; cancers develop over long periods of time, and we cannot keep a group of people isolated from particular pollution such as radiation for the necessary length of time to observe the result.

There is no evidence of either safety or harm, and although it is often quoted that there is ?no evidence of harm? (from radiation), this is not the same as saying there is evidence of no harm.

Mr Eberlie goes on to state the mobile phone?s field strength is ?so very small?. I do not think any engineer would agree with this; with field strengths from 10 to 100 volts per metre they are capable of causing sparks between metal parts and are a fire risk at petrol stations.

Mr Eberlie then tells us it is safer to text than to make a long mobile phone call. If a phone is not dangerous in the first place, as claimed, how can avoiding using it for long be safer? Is this an admission he doesn?t really trust mobile phones after all?

The field strengths experienced close to a mast will be less than using a mobile phone, but this does not imply they are acceptable. Also, do not forget that the phone user has chosen to use the phone, and to take the risks; people in proximity to a mast have not chosen but still have to take the risks.

Rob James

Horrabridge

I AM delighted Cllr Dick Eberlie has attempted to calm residents? fears about the upgrade to the Orange mast. As far as he is concerned, the effect of the mast can be compared to a microwave and, as the mast is 40ft high, we will not feel the heat! That was, indeed, the thinking in the 80?s.

Modern scientists have established that humans are electromagnetic beings and adversely affected by exposure to external frequencies from the entire transmission infrastructure of mobile phone technology, which can cause us to pulse to the wrong beat. The 3G technology uses a pulsed transmission extremely close to some of our brain?s electrical and electrochemical rhythms.

Other nations take this threat so seriously they have limited the amount of radiation masts are allowed to emit to below an 8th of that allowed in this country.

Their studies show detrimental effects such as impaired memory, reduced reaction time, sleeplessness, moodswings, altered behaviour and headaches occured in a study of 500 people living within 300m of a newly erected mast.

In this case they agree with Cllr Eberlie, the nearer the mast the higher the problems. Hold the phone away from your head or use text is his advice but for those of us living within the 300m radius of a mast the situation is not so simple.

Finally Swedish research has shown mobile phone radiation is able to cause brain cell damage and even more worrying is the finding that mobile mast radiation can affect DNA. Lab tests using human cells have shown that mobile phone radiation is ?genotoxic??able to interfere with cellular chromosomes and DNA. Genotoxity is a known risk factor for cancer.

I agree the masts are ?ugly?, but I also feel, in view of the research, they are also dangerous and should not be within 300m of any residential area. This was the recomendation of the Government?s report by Professor William Stewart, 11 May 2000. Disregarded by Government in a clear reflection of political-commercial pressures.

David Farrant

Quarry House

Tavistock