Radio Towers vs. Cell Phone Towers - would really appreciate any info, thanks!!

Hi all.  Sorry for posting this question again but I didn't get any responses the first time around.  Also I've received notice that my current lease is being terminated at the end of the month so I am in a tough spot trying to find a new place to live in about ten days time.

Anyways, found a place on Vashon Island in Washington State that I like but Vashon is apparently home to a few "massive" AM radio towers and tranmitters.  The place I'm looking at is about 2 miles from the radio towers which I would consider a very acceptable distance if these were cell phone towers, but not sure in the case of radio.

My question is whether radio towers, generally speaking, are on the same level as cell phone towers in terms of their potential to cause trouble for ES folks and the distance we need to keep from them or if they are generally "worse" and require greater caution, greater distance, etc.

Thanks a ton for any info anyone can provide.  I've added some info on Vashon's radio towers below.  It sounds ominous but maybe it's not as bad as I fear if these are no worse than cell phone towers.

----

"Maury Island is home to numerous AM transmitters. KIRO 710 (built in 1941) has two massive towers for its 50,000 watts day/night transmitter. KTTH 770, which transmits 50,000 watts during the day and 5,000 watts at night, shares towers with KFNQ. KIRO and KTTH are owned by Bonneville International.
There was a tower originally built in 1946 for KEVR 1090AM, which later became KING radio, is now KFNQ and owned by CBS. It transmits 50,000 watts day/night and now operates 3 towers. This site is shared with KTTH.

On Vashon Island, radio station KVI 570 has a single tower on a beach in Tramp Harbor, nicknamed "KVI Beach." KVI transmits 24 hours a day at 5,000 watts. KOMO 1000 transmits 50,000 watts day/night and has a three tower setup on the northeast corner of the island. Both KVI and KOMO are owned by Seattle-based Fisher Broadcasting.
KGNW AM 820 propagates its signal from three towers in the center of the island. It operates 50,000 watts during the day and 5,000 at night. It is owned by Salem Communications. KJR 950 shares the towers at the KGNW site, transmits 50,000 watts day/night, and is owned by Clear Channel Communications.

These stations have located their transmitters on Vashon and Maury Islands because soil conductivity, important to signal propagation in the AM broadcast frequency range, is greater than elsewhere around Puget Sound.

Hi,

This depends really on the person. Everyone is different. Through all the mobile technology I understood that I am electro sensitive - but I was already electro sensitive before mobile technology came into being. So I think I had really a problem with radio signals. I wonder it is really the worst for me. I can't sleep at all when I am near a radio tower. I found out about it when I was Italy in and were searching for mobile and Wi-Fi free zones. I found them, but then there was still something going on. So I found out there is more in the air :-) , much more! This really a subjective impression. I am still try to find out myself what really caused me the trouble.
Stefanie


--- russel395 <[hidden email]> schrieb am Mo, 18.2.2013:

On February 18, russel395 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi all.  Sorry for posting this question again but I didn't get any
> responses the first time around.

Yes, I would interpret that as "nobody here knows".  I suppose
you could visit the area and see how you feel there.  It seems to
me that radio towers would be operating with a lot more
power than cellphone towers, so you may need to be further
away from them to be safe.

On the other hand, most of that power is probably being used for
analog broadcasts, and I suspect that analog broadcasts are
more tolerable than digital broadcasts.  However, if those
same towers are being used for HD radio or digital TV
stations, then that make things worse.

Certainly there have been studies showing higher rates of
cancer around broadcast antennas, but I don't recall if
these studies were looking at TV or radio towers, and
how far away from the towers was considered "safe"
from a cancer-perspective.

Marc

Thanks Stephanie.  The fact that you can't sleep near a radio tower is informative and helpful.

--- In [hidden email], Stefanie Toth <stefaniet2@...> wrote:

Thanks Marc.  Yeah, I figured it was possible that nobody had an answer but thought it wouldn't hurt to ask again.  I am leaning towards staying away from this house.  WIth both ES and MCS it is just so hard to find a place...

--- In [hidden email], Marc Martin <marc@...> wrote:

My is written with a F - Stefanie. Is this so difficult to recognize??
Stefanie


--- russel395 <[hidden email]> schrieb am Mo, 18.2.2013:

Hi Russ,

I've written before about radio and TV towers.
Go to http://esens.966376.n3.nabble.com and search for "Sutro Tower"
There it is, 2011.Sep.15, top of the list.

I also downloaded a presentation by Dr. Magda Havas (2008) where the
distances for towers in studies for health effects was given at 32
minutes in. http://www.youtube.com/v/OmK6r0ntroE
Health effects were measured at
4 km for Broadcast towers.
400 meters for cellular towers.
The studies compared to people three times that distance, to approach
"safe" levels, 12 Km is 7.5 miles for broadcast towers.
And of course, I have trouble with cellular at 7 miles... so the bottom
line may be, it Depends on each individual's response and sensitivity.


> but Vashon is apparently home to a few "massive" AM radio towers and tranmitters.  

> My question is whether radio towers, generally speaking, are on the same level as cell phone towers in terms of their potential to cause trouble for ES folks
>  

I thought analog transmitters were generally safer, as the rise in EHS
really took off with digital communications. Remember the "jackhammer"
vs. "strong wind" illustration.
BUT there are studies going back 100 years showing that Electrification
is the root cause of modern diseases.

I agree, Puget Sound is a beautiful place. But I had to leave that area,
so edit my verb to "Was".

Stewart

--
http://seahorseCorral.org

Sorry Stefanie.  Must be the brain fog.  I have a friend named Jennipher and everyone is always spelling her name with an "f" instead of a "ph" and I know it bugs her.

Russ

--- In [hidden email], Stefanie Toth <stefaniet2@...> wrote:

Thanks a ton Stewart. That info is extremely helpful.

I actually thought the Olympic Peninsula might be one of the better places in the country to live as far as getting away from EMFs.  I've found places that are 2+ miles from the nearest cell phone antenna and thought that was a pretty good and rare find.  Were you more referring to the areas closer to Seattle?  Or is there something bad about the Olympic Peninsula area as well?  Maybe something that doesn't show up in the antenna counts/distances data?

Thanks!

Russ

--- In [hidden email], S Andreason <sandreas41@...> wrote:

On February 19, russel395 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I actually thought the Olympic Peninsula might be one of the better
> places in the country to live as far as getting away from EMFs.  
> Or is there something bad about the Olympic Peninsula area as well?

You might find that there are Smart Meters in parts of the Olympic
Peninsula.  Although some Smart Meters are apparently not as bad
as others (e.g., I didn't notice anything at all from the Smart Meters
on Orcas Island)

Marc

Hi Russ,

Yes, I meant close to Seattle, say east of Sequim or Port Angeles.
When I look at a cellular coverage map, the whole I-5 corridor is built
up now with total coverage.

I drove around the Olympic Penninsula on Hwy-101 back in 1995. Except
for the tower(s) at Forks, the entire NW corner, north of Quinault River
should be much quieter than most places. I strongly believe there are
lots of dead zones out there, but it is all National Forest, and
Weyerhauser Tree farm.

They did add a NextRad at Aberdeen a few years ago.
South of Aberdeen, enters the area I lived, and intensively studied for
places to move to.

Stewart


russel395 wrote:
> I actually thought the Olympic Peninsula might be one of the better places in the country to live as far as getting away from EMFs.  I've found places that are 2+ miles from the nearest cell phone antenna and thought that was a pretty good and rare find.  Were you more referring to the areas closer to Seattle?  Or is there something bad about the Olympic Peninsula area as well?  Maybe something that doesn't show up in the antenna counts/distances data?
>
>  

--
http://seahorseCorral.org

I welcome and invite any and all information about the EMF and the Olympic Peninsula...especially Kitsap County.

My research shows that PSE will not have ~really~ "smart" meters deployed for another 2 or so years. I have been assured by a nice rep at PSE that the meters which are in place now (and some appear to be very digital looking) are not addressable, do not broadcast a neighborhood's usage to a central neighborhood modem, and do not collect ~any~ information other than power usage.

They DO broadcast a .5 W signal at just over 900 MHz every 5 minutes for the drive-by meter readers. (Something I'll shield against)

An Opt-Out (or similar) program is being developed and I hope it's not like CA where it costs thou$ands to join and $80 a month to pay for not being irradiated and to eventually pay for not having one's privacy violated. The rep said it'd be more like $10 per month but didn't know for sure.

Getting a true analog power meter would take a humongous grass-roots movement AND court orders or legislation, I suspect.

I plan to do reflective and absorptive shielding for my mom's (and my) house/living areas after I find some way to measure ALL the relevant EMF frequencies from ELF to microwave. It's possible to worsen a living environment without measurements and without knowing about the physics involved.

...argh...

Hi drcarl.  That is consistent with what I found when I looked into this a while back.  The PSE smart meters are of a different variety and more limited functionality than the ones causing so many problems elsewhere in the country and are therefore probably not as harmful though not benign either.

Russ

--- In [hidden email], "drcarl" <drcarl@...> wrote:

--- On Mon, 2/18/13, russel395 <[hidden email]> wrote:
My question is whether radio towers, generally speaking, are on the same
 level as cell phone towers in terms of their potential to cause trouble
 for ES folks and the distance we need to keep from them or if they are
generally "worse" and require greater caution, greater distance, etc
Russell,
One thing to remember about Vashon Island is that the Dual Doppler Radar
 station at Langley scans it 24/7 and also, consider ships in the area for Radar and neighbors with Wi-Fi.  Add that to the EMF stew that your will be stewing in.
For ES folks, I consider Radio Towers dangerous and to be avoided.  We know that Radio Tower Workers wear protective clothing and have high rates of cancer, so we know that Radio Towers are dangerous close up. And they say that at a High Powered AM Radio Tower you can
actually hold a  flourescent light bulb in your hand and it will light
up with out being connected to anything.  But that is close up, what about 2 miles away?  
http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q90.html



















"Calculations can be performed to predict what field intensity
levels would exist at various distances from an antenna. Since energy at some
frequencies is absorbed by the human body more readily than energy at other
frequencies, the existence of a possible hazard would depend on the frequency
of the transmitted signal as well as the intensity."





Also, watch out because they often put Microwave repeater dishes on
Radio Towers.  The further away from a Radio Tower, the better.  As Stuart says, 2 miles may not be completely adequate, but, if the Wi-Fi, and Microwave levels are low near the
place you want to move, I would tend to say, yes, that two miles away
from the Radio Tower may be acceptable for you for a couple of years,
before you get sensitized to it, depending on how strong it is and what other EMF sources your body is dealing with at the same time.  After all, it is hard to find any safe place to live these days and you could do a lot worse. 

Take into consideration that the acceptable levels for
exposure specified in the ARPANSA Radiation Protection Standard “Maximum
Exposure Levels to Radiofrequency Fields – 3 kHz to 300 GHz”  are based on the same "thermal effect" rationale used for saying that microwave radiation from Cell Towers and Cell Phones is harmless, because there are no "heating" effects in tissues.  Well, we all know that is bull.
Quote: ARPANSA , which sets public and
occupational limits of exposure to radiofrequency radiation, is designed to avoid
adverse heating effects where people are exposed to RF EME. 

It's not about heating of tissues, but about disruption of cellular frequencies, and  cumulative effects over time with cellular imprinting of frequencies.  An analogy is ionizing radiation. Small doses must be added together to
compute the total loading of effects on the body. One single pin prick
will do little harm to a person. However, several thousand in a day can
lead to a decline in health."

Mark said:  "I
suppose you could visit the area and see how you feel there."
In
 my own experience, I don't think that is a reliable method of
determining.  If you have not yet been sensitized to the frequencies of
the Radio Tower, you won't feel anything.  But living near them for 6
months to 5 years could set you off.  Of course, the further away, the longer it would take.

I lived about half a mile from the Queen Anne Radio Towers in Seattle for ten years and they did much damage to my health.  During that time I was constantly grinding my teeth, getting infections, having trouble sleeping, vertigo, dizziness, having blood sugar problems, calcium leaching from my bones, and on and on.  I was always going to the doctor.  But, I also had a cordless phone in the house.  The combination was terrible.  Seattle is a very toxic city in many many ways. 

There are plenty of studies on the adverse health effects of Radio Towers.  These are only a few.

http://www.webstracts.com/ISEA2002/catsort/10694.pdf


       
               
               
       
       
               
                       
                               
                                        Background: Public concern about the health effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure have been
increased. This study was performed to investigate the association between residing near AM radio
broadcasting towers and childhood leukemia and brain cancer in Korea with case control design.


                               
                       
               
       


       
               
               
       
       
               
                       
                               
                                        Conclusion: This study results showed the increased risks of childhood leukemia and brain cancer without
statistical significances in the vicinity of radio broadcast towers.

                               
                       
               
       


http://www.neilcherry.com/documents/90_r2_EMR_Living_Near_Broadcast_Towers_Health.pdf

       
               
               
       
       
               
                       
                               
                                        Health Effects in the vicinity of Radio/TV
towers and mobile phone base stations

                               
                       
               
       


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12096679?dopt=Abstract
Cent Eur J Public Health. 2002 Jun;10(1-2):24-8.
The effect of low level radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on the excretion rates of stress hormones in operators during 24-hour shifts.
Vangelova K, Israel M, Mihaylov S.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of long term exposure to low level radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic (EM) radiation on the excretion rates of stress hormones in satellite station operators during 24-hour shifts. Twelve male operators at a satellite station for TV communications and space research were studied during 24-hour shifts. Dosimetric evaluation of the exposure was carried out and showed low level exposure with specific absorption of 0.1127 J.kg-1. A control group of 12 unexposed male operators with similar job task and the same shift system were studied, too. The 11-oxycorticosteroids (11-OCS), adrenaline and noradrenaline were followed by spectrofluorimetric methods on 3-hour intervals during the 24-hour shifts. The data were analyzed by tests for interindividual analysis, Cosinor analysis and analysis of variance (ANOVA). Significant increase in the 24-hour excretion of 11-OCS and disorders in its circadian rhythm,
 manifested by increase in the mesor, decrease in the amplitude and shift in the acrophase were found in the exposed operators. The changes in the excretion rates of the catecholamines were significant and showed greater variability of both variables. The long term effect of the exposure to low-level RF EM radiation evoked pronounced stress reaction with changes in the circadian rhythm of 11-OCS and increased variability of catecholamines secretion. The possible health hazards associated with observed alteration in the stress system need to be clarified by identification of their significance and prognostic relevance.
PMID: 12096679 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


C. [hidden email] Refugee




 










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks C.a.b.

--- In [hidden email], "C.a.b. Johnson" <superdrove@...> wrote: