As a proposed cell tower at Loundonville Presbyterian Church awaits site-plan approval from the town, pastor Elaine Woroby said the science shows it is not dangerous, but parents of students at the elementary school expressed concerns about exposure to the low levels of energy given off by such a tower.
The cell tower issue has polarized the community, with protestors holding a rally Saturday, March 20, against its construction. John Mousaw led the chants of those gathered at the park on the corner of Menand Road and Route 9 with shouts of, No cell tower! Do the right thing!
Kate Phelps, who lives across the street from the church said the consistency of the signal is what worries her.
`It’s 20 years pounding on my 7-year-old,` she said.
Tara Cavosi said she has two young children, both preparing to go to the school, and she too is worried about the proposal.
Prospective candidate for the 109th New York State Assembly District, Jennifer Whalen, said she was at the rally advocating for Loudonville Elementary Students.
She said she does not support `anything that poses a risk` to children, and if there is any chance that it is a health threat, it does not belong near the school.
Loudonville parent Amy Fox, who is listed as a contact for a new organization SAFE, or School Areas Free of Emissions, said she is disappointed with the church’s decision.
`There couldn’t be a greater oxymoron than a church putting a financial golden calf in front of its moral obligation to the community by creating a potential health risk to the thousands of children that will attend Loudonville School over the next 20-40 years. Town officials are responsible for protecting the health and welfare of residents, especially where children are at the very center of an issue.`
She is asking the planning board to deny the site plan for the tower.
John O’Malley, a spokesman for Verizon, said the cell phone provider had been interested in the area for a while since coverage there has been spotty and inconsistent, especially in buildings.
`It’s been a trouble a spot for a while,` O’Malley said. There are pine trees on three sides of the proposed 60-foot tower, and he said there are aesthetic and practical advantages of putting the tower in that location.
`It’s a typical cell tower,` he said. `There really is no scientific evidence that cell towers pose any threat to a person’s health,` O’Malley said.
He said the Federal Communications Commission, American Cancer Society, the Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization do not have any concrete science to connect the towers with cancer or other health effects.
O’Malley said cell towers are built to extremely stringent guidelines, and every one of Verizon’s towers are built well within those parameters.
He said the towers operate on about 50 watts, which is far lower than television and radio towers that emit as many as 100,000 watts. The horizontal signal emanates at the tree line and goes from one tower to the next.
`There’s very little energy radiated toward the ground,` he said. Information form the American Cancer Society corroborates the claim that ground level power levels are significantly lower than near the antenna.
O’Malley said although cellular technology as we know it today is only about 25 years old, wireless emissions from UHA television channels and radio stations have been around for much longer.
Cordless phones, baby monitors and wireless hot-spots emit similar radio frequency, or RF, waves as the proposed tower will, and people use those every day, he said.
Angela Smith, a spokeswoman with the American Cancer Society’s Loudonville office, said the ACS does not have any statistics to support the parents’ concerns about the tower.
`There is no research to say exposure to emissions from cell towers causes cancer,` she said. `We go with the research.`
She did note though, cell towers are a `new technology,` which will continue to be studied.
`Cellular phone towers, like cellular phones themselves, are a relatively new technology, and we do not yet have full information on health effects. In particular, not enough time has elapsed to permit epidemiologic studies. There are some theoretical reasons why cellular phone towers would not be expected to increase cancer risk, and animal studies of RF have not suggested a risk of cancer,` according to information from the ACS.
Studies specifically dealing with cell tower exposure and human beings have not yet been conducted.
According to information from the ACS Web site, the RF waves are `non-ionizing,` meaning they are not strong enough to break the chemical bonds between molecules such as DNA, like gamma and X-rays do. The front of the cell tower antenna is the only significant source of energy as well, and in order to approach FCC limits, one would need to remain near the front of the antenna at its elevation.
Several expert agencies have not weighed in yet on the effects of cell towers, according to the ACS, including the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the National Toxicology Program, and the US Environmental Protection Agency.
`No human studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers or even on radio waves more generally. Several studies have looked at the effects of radio waves and microwaves combined; these have generally not shown any increase in cancer, except for a U.S. Air Force study that suggested an increase in brain tumors in association with radiofrequency/microwave exposure,` according to the ACS Web site.
Dr. David Carpenter, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at SUNY Albany, said the parents’ concerns about the tower are justified, even though there are no studies specifically about human disease and cell phone towers.
Even without concrete evidence the towers will increase cancer rates, `there are many reasons to expect that it might,` said Carpenter.
He said cell phones emit the same radiation as the towers, and although that frequency is not such that it will ionize, or split, DNA or other biological molecules, it will split water. In doing so, `free radicals` are created which are atoms in the body essentially floating where they do not belong.
He said cell towers will hit a human with less energy than the phones, which has users at point-blank range, but the amount of time of exposure is a concern.
`We are all exposed,` he said. `The towers are emitting the energy for 24/7,` which is not at as concentrated as what comes from the phones, but, he said, over time it could be a problem.
Carpenter discussed the 2007 BioInitiative report, which tackled electromagnetic fields and their potential health risks. The report led to the European Parliament imposing stricter restrictions on where cell towers can be located.
`This report stands as a wake-up call that long-term exposure to some kinds of EMF [electromagnetic field] may cause serious health effects. Good public health planning is needed now to prevent cancers and neurological diseases linked to exposure to power lines and other sources of EMF. We need to educate people and our decision-makers that ‘business as usual’ is unacceptable,` Carpenter said at the time the report was issued.
“