To Mr. Adam Gauntlet: Dr. Carpenter's facts are correct. The possible link between EMF and cancer was reported in a US EPA study as long ago as 1990 and was confirmed at a workshop 31 medical professional and scientists held at Brooklyn Park, Minnesota in June 1998. The qualifications of Dr. Carpenter are briefly: the former Dean of the School of Public Health at the State University of New York and now a Professor in the Department of Environmental Health and Toxicology. He has for many years been involved in the investigation of the potential health effects of EMF. It is easy to sound knowledgeable on a subject, but next time you write please state your qualifications and experience in the field of EMF research or epidemiology or toxicology, particularly before you question those of another person. By the way, the study on mice which you refer to was conducted to determine if mice/people, who are genetically predisposed to infliction by cancer are even more at risk when exposed to EMF. Did you really think that Dr. Carpenter was not aware of this or that he would stoop to distort the outcome of credible, published scientific work? To the unnamed, Medical Health Officer of Vancouver: Given that there is uncertainty and some studies are suggestive of health risks, why are you lending support to exposure of children to EMF? If prudent avoidance is not possible why has the state of Salzburg in Austria introduced a guideline level in cooperation with the telecommunications industry of 0.1 microWatt/sq.cm. To quote the Public Health Department of Salzburg/Unit for Environmental Medicine "the standard even in the City of Salzburg is achievable''. Why has a standard of 0.001 microWatts/sq.cm been introduced in New South Wales Australia? Why, if as you say there is little benefit in trying to protect school children, has New Zealand begun a programme of removing towers out of the vicinity of schools? To Mr. Bearden: Talk about hysteria. The emotional tone of your letters has taken us, your neighbours, aback. We are simply doing what we think is best for our families. Sources of expert opinions, such as the group of scientists who recently met in Vienna, Austria (we can provide a list of their names and the organisations, which they represent) have been identified in letters to the Editor. These scientists have concluded that the human body is affected by EMF at levels which are 10,000 or more times lower than the FCC standards and that given this fact, the public should have a say in the siting of towers.

There is no shortage of expert uncertainty about the safety of EMF. Why are you so certain? To the Authorities who like to quote other Authorities: The European Parliament who are advised by scientific panels, councils and commissions have formally adopted the precautionary position which we, of CARE, are espousing.

They have accepted the threat of EMF to public health. New European legislation will set strict standards and limits, and based on these standards the proximity of EMF emitting facilities to residences will be limited.

Some statements from the European legislative proposal are as follows: "The European Parliament in its resolution on combating the harmful effects of non-ionising radiation called on the Commission to propose legislative measures seeking to limit the exposure of workers and the public to non-ionising electromagnetic radiation.'' Many studies point to the probability of long-term effects even at exposure levels of less than 0.1-0.2 microtesla'' (teslas are a measure of the magnetic component of electromagnetic fields). "Member states shall in keeping with the limits set out in Annex II lay down a minimum safety distance from electrical equipment and minimum distances from public buildings, housing and workplaces for the siting of high voltage transmission lines, radar equipment and broadcasting and re-broadcasting transmitters including cellular phone base stations.'' To Mr. Francis Mussenden: You have complete control over your microwave oven.

No one made you buy it, no one makes you use it; yet even so you are slightly worried about it. A microwave oven is totally benign when it is turned off.

How would you like to be forced to leave it on for 24 hours a day and have your child be made to sit on it? This microwave oven comparison has gone far enough! WITH CARE Warwick Know your telephone March 22, 1999 Dear Sir, I feel I must respond to "Still holding femail'' from the March 22 edition of your fine daily. The "Voice Mail'' and "Automated Attendant'' features of most modern PBX (private branch exchange) systems are a major convenience to those of us who are patient enough to use them and a major step forward for anybody who has faced an endless "busy tone'' or "ringing tone'' before.

First a brief lesson on how your telephone works.

You dial the number, the telephone exchange routes your call to that number and all of its' associated lines and gives you either a "ringing tone'' (ring, pause, ring, etc.) or "busy tone'' (beep, beep, beep, etc.).

In the bad old days you had two options.

1. If there was nobody truly available to answer your call but an incoming line to that firm was free then you could have been faced with a very long wait (ring, pause, ring, etc.) while you asked yourself if this firm was even open that day.

2. If all the lines were engaged then it was (beep, beep, beep) hang up, dial again, (beep, beep, beep) and so on with no guarantee that someone wasn't going to beat you to the next available line. (This was really annoying when you were using a pay phone.) At the end of this exercise you would probably find that you had made no contact with this firm at all despite spending quite a bit of time trying.

Flash forward to today when the current economic realities mean even fewer "real human beings'' and the situation would be even worse (endless ring, pause, ring). The magic of modern electronics and the Voice Mail feature gives a firm the ability to make option one a virtual impossibility, and along with an extra incoming line or two (after all, the automated attendant can handle the overflow) to drastically reduce the chance of option two.

There can be no doubt that an improperly maintained system can cause annoyance. Not entering new employee names fast enough, a poorly arranged menu of choices, or a particularly bad or distorted "music on hold'' choice come to mind. These are faults with the implementation of the technology not with the technology itself.

At the end of the day I'd still rather listen to Beethovens' Fifth than (ring, pause, ring) or, (beep, beep, beep.) DJTECH Smith's Parish Taxi meter monopoly January 15, 1999 Dear Sir, It was very interesting to read in the Mid Ocean News about some taxis not being able to work on New Year's Eve, because of a malfunctioning in the taxi meters.

The amazing part of this incident wasn't so much the faulty metres, but the mere fact that only Mr. Eve (Government appointee to fix taxi meters) was able to fix the problem and he, Mr. Eve, had to fly overseas to obtain the necessary piece in order to get the meters working again.

I will never accept that Mr. Eve is the only one that can fix taxi meters. How unfair! It's amazing that Telco now has competition and so should Mr. Eve. He should not be the only one to service our 500 cabs. The work should be shared around. Do you think that if we had two taxi meter technicians on the Island, the New Year's incident would have caused chaos -- no! The drivers would have gone to John Doe! It's food for thought. Maybe our new Minister of Transport could look into this monopoly. I have been wanting to write and say something about this for a very long time and now it's off my chest. Now I can go and buy my taxi driver sweetheart a calculator that will keep him "on line''. I hope Mr. Eve is preparing for the new millennium taxi meters. Maybe we will all go down to Devonshire and help him (Mr. Eve) out! CARMEN J. MARSHALL City of Hamilton Deadly traps March 16, 1999 Dear Sir, Today we went to the ducks and saw 18 ducks, two roosters, one chicken and three baby chicks. Three weeks ago we saw 30 ducks, two roosters, two chickens, and three baby chicks. Today we also saw an egg which was broken. We think the rats ate it. There are traps that ducks can't get into but rats can.

There is rat poison where the rats go. They die! Last time we saw ten geese.

Now there are none. Doesn't Government know about these special traps for poison, that catch and kill the rats, but don't hurt the ducks? ASHLEY DAWSON Age 10 Sandys The debate on EMF March 17, 1999 Dear Sir, We continue to offer information about the global debate on the safety of EMF.

We have hard evidence of uncertainty. Where is the evidence of certainty with respect to the safety of EMF? We do not accept "views'' that EMF is safe.

Where are the extensive studies of the type which drugs are subjected to before being released to the general public; albeit that these drugs will be taken voluntarily and not force-fed as is the case with EMF in the vicinity of cellular towers. Read on: PROPERTY COMPANIES STOP MOBILE PHONE ANTENNAS ON ROOFS Svenska Dagbladet (daily conservative newspaper in Stockholm, Sweden) reports that two extremely large property owners (Poseidon and Bostadsbolaget), in Gothenburg, Sweden have stopped the setting up of any more mobile telephone antennas on their buildings. They have been put up in secrecy, on roofs and on facades: the broadcasting antennas for mobile phones.

From the base station positioned in the basement, a cable runs all the way up the building. "We are talking about microwave radiation and even if it is below the norms, it is not zero. Today we do not know anything of the long-term effects'', says professor Yngve Hamnerius at Chalmers, the technical university in Gothenburg, Sweden. He will embark on a study on how much we are affected by microwave radiation. Even if the people who live in the house with the antenna on the roof, get exposed to less microwave radiation than a person speaking on a mobile phone, they are exposed for a longer period. (Reporter: Catharina Ingelman Sundberg.) WE ARE NOT ALONE Warwick