» Linda Buzzell-Saltzman wrote on 11/19/08 @ 06:52 AM

I think some residents may be concerned about safety issues. Can science tell us what dangers the electro-magnetic frequencies (EMFs) from cell towers might pose to residents? Are there methods for minimizing those risks?

These days we need to operate from the Precautionary Principle: not adopting new technologies until they’ve been sufficiently vetted for public safety.  Otherwise we’re always playing catch-up when we discover that some highly-touted new hi-tech wonder is causing serious harm to health and environment.

» Native SBer wrote on 11/19/08 @ 09:48 AM

Just add cell phones to the list...stalled ‘Hwy 101’ revamp for the past 40+ years. They did a great job on that one prolonging the construction of additional lanes. Don’t even think of the cost to taxpayers.  Don’t even think of the poor air quality for all us locals as cars sit for hours on end bottle-necked on 101 - we all know the story. Our ‘self-appointed’ Montecito leaders have been very proud of all the ‘stops’ and ‘Not In Our Backyard’ decisions made. How very unfortunate members of our community were unable to communicate at such a critical time of need.  Let’s all remember that when we have to evacuate using Hwy 101 South.

» John Locke wrote on 11/19/08 @ 04:35 PM

Linda Buzzell-Saltzmann:  “new technologies”?  Cellphone technology has been around for over 30 years and in the mainstream for over 20 years.  When does “new” become not-so-new in your world?  And please do your research - while there are some studies that indicate a potential cancer risk from a cellPHONE held against your head 8 hours a day for years, all studies regarding cellTOWERs indicate no or immeasurably small risk. In fact, the spot of least radiation is directly below the tower - ironic in view of the uproar surrounding the Cold Spring tower proposal (oh, dear, our children will get cancer and grow additional ears - NOT - they stand a better chance of being struck by lightning)

» Robert Fay wrote on 11/19/08 @ 10:08 PM

As an RF (Radio Frequency) engineer I’m can’t claim to understand every potential affect of the electromagnitic field that occurs during RF propagation but I can tell you that the level of exposure is predicated on two major attributes; power and proximity. As Mr. Locke alreaday pointed out the concern over midical risk has centered around the proximity of a cell phone antenna to the body, particularly the head. Portable cell phones have a maximum RF power output of 0.6 watts but automatically reduce their power to the lowest level required to maintain a good connection to the cell site provide service in the area of operation. Since the effective power drops rapidly as the distance between the radiating element (antenna) and the receptor (be it a reciving antenna or your body) your cell phone poses more of a threat to you than the cell site providing the cellular service does. In fact, barring local cell sites forces the automatic power control of cell phones within the restricted zone to ramp up to the maximum power level in an attempt (often futile) to establish communications with a distant cell site outside the restricted zone. The reality, the much higher power of portable 2-way radios used every day by an endless array of professionals including the very school administrators you entrust your children to (typically 4.0-5.0 watts) would theoretically pose a far greater risk. These higher powered systems have been in use over 50-years without any demonstrable medical issues. People like myself that routinely work on even higher power RF equipment or on collocation sites where many high power transmitters in simultaneous use can raise the exposure levels to thousands of watts have not showed any increased frequency of cancer or other undesired effects thus the fear surround this topic stems not from knowledge but from ignorance in much the same way as researchers have previously caused undue alarm suggesting something poses a health risk based on the results of tests in which they feed lab rats 100’s even 1,000’s of times the typical or prescribed ammount. Time has shown that all this ever proved was that ingesting excessive ammounts of virtually anything, even water, can be a hazard to your health. Decisions should be predicated on fact not fiction and the media needs to cease its trend toward yellow journalism and resume report factual information in an objective manner

» John Locke wrote on 11/20/08 @ 08:24 AM

Thanks to Mr. Fay for a very clear science-based explanation of the cellphone radiation risk.  Interesting that the lack of a nearby tower means the phone in your (or your child’s) pocket becomes a bigger risk.  Now, Montecito, will you please get over yourselves and get a tower up?

» Marillyn Gilbert wrote on 11/20/08 @ 10:25 AM

I am not sure what Mr. Seybold meant about lack of cellular service.  Although my cell phone did not work during the fire and for several days thereafter, it worked before, and works now again.  However, if one wants to complain about the lack of INFORMATION during the fire, I would be the first to agree!  We live on Sycamore Canyon Road, and for four days, could not find out if our house was still “alive” - where the fire was still burning, nor, when we tried to go back to see if our house was still standing, when we could return - no reason given why we couldn’t (since as it turned out, our house was in fact still there!), and at one point, a very rude young woman who is a Sheriff, barked at my husband when he tried to get some information as to when we could return.  That was three days after the fire!  We are very appreciative of the amazing hard work by our fire and sheriff departments and police departments, but I do think there should be better information coming from our public leaders.

» Radio Guy wrote on 11/20/08 @ 03:44 PM

Bob, thanks for the good explanation on RF.

Linda, if you are in fear of RF, you need to toss out your microwave oven.  You get a heck of a lot more RF from that than a cell site.  Oh also when you do actually talk on your phone assuming that you have one, you are also exposing a lot more RF to yourself than that cell site down the street.  A whole lot of studies and nothing.  The Federal Gov’t has regualtions and the cell companies follow these.  The MPE is something that is not overlooked.

Radio Guy