Permit me to provide some information on the issue of the healthfulness of microwave radiation such as that broadcast by the transmitters of cellular telephone systems. I have an earned Ph.D. in physics and am certified in the comprehensive practice of industrial hygiene -- the prevention of diseases arising from exposure to potentially hazardous environmental agents -- by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene.

I have studied the non-ionising electromagnetic field extensively to learn how to safeguard people from its potential hazards to health; to signify this I now call myself a "bioelectromagnetic hygienist''. I am currently scheduled to present two papers based on my research at the June, 1999, annual meeting of the Biolectromagnetics Society, of which I am a member.

Cellular telephone systems use a portion of the radio frequency spectrum known as microwave radiation. They broadcast this radiation into the air from fixed base transmitters, and also from small hand-held radiotelephones, at intensities that are regarded as safe by electrical engineers because they are very low in comparison to existing consensus safety standards, all of which can be traced back to the 1966 ANSI standard: ANSI C95. (ANSI refers to the American National Standards Institute.) Electrical engineering is not a health profession. In the USA, however, following a unique military-sponsored conference hurriedly convened in March, 1953, electrical engineers have been actively establishing health standards for exposure to microwave and other radio frequency radiation in the USA with little challenge from other professions.

The basis for their standard -- ANSI C95 -- originally was the heating effect of microwaves on mammalian tissues. The claim by electrical of expertise has been based on their knowledge of electromagnetic field theory and their familiarity with the instruments used to measure the electromagnetic field.

Electrical engineers have done a good job, overall, in preventing injury to human beings from the heating effects of microwave radiation. However, this profession has mostly denied the existence of other adverse effects upon human and mammalian health which do not arise from heat generation: nonthermal effects.

Nonthermal effects include cancer (which has been shown to be associated with long-term exposure to pulsed microwave radiation in two different controlled laboratory experiments on rodents) and adverse effects upon the nervous system, which -- being highly electrical in nature -- is extremely sensitive to external electromagnetic fields of appropriate frequency, especially at very low intensities.

In 1958 the chief sanitary inspector of the former Soviet Union, V. Ahdanov, approved "Temporary Safety Regulations for Personnel in the Presence of Microwave Generators'' which set an 8-hour exposure limit that was a thousand times lower than that established in the USA by electrical engineers. This standard was promulgated on the basis of many decades of careful clinical examination of exposed personnel by Soviet physicians, as well as animal studies; it was designed to protect the sensitive human nervous system from dysfunction.

In the USA the position of electrical engineers in key positions, such as those belonging to the ANSI C95 committee, was that there was no scientific foundation for the Soviet standard. Because no other profession in the USA was paying as much attention to the issue of nonionizing radiation health hazards as electrical engineers were, except for some individual physicians with a professional interest, the decision made within the electrical engineering profession largely determined the US position on this issue.

It has long been controversial whether nonthermal effects actually exist.

Electrical engineers have denied their existence (thereby justifying the failure of the ANSI standard to protect people against them). But the scientific literature contains many published reports of nonthermal biological effects. Not only are such effects real, but their likely occurrence can be predicted from theory, as I am prepared to show! Here in the USA only one qualified health professional has ever tried to challenge the historical dominance of the electrical engineering profession in establishing a protective standard for human exposure to microwave radiation.

That was 20 years ago when Leonard Solon, a Ph.D. health physicist then employed by New York City, published his recommendation for a reduced level of exposure to microwave radiation. Unfortunately, politicians in the local municipal government failed to approve his recommendation.

In mid-November, 1997, in New York City, electrosensitive residents suddenly began experiencing horrific sensations inside their bodies. The onset of this experience, which made them flee the city to get away from it, seems to have been associated with the start-up of a PCS system providing what was then a new digital cellular service, although it was never properly investigated. I call these people microwave refugees.

There were hardly any reports in the ordinarily news media about them, but they formed a group which is party to a lawsuit filed against the Federal Communications Commission, alleging that it has failed to protect residents of the USA from the harmful effects of exposure to the radiation from cellular phone systems. A federal appeals court hearing on this lawsuit took place April 5, 1999, in New York City; no decision has yet been rendered.

To summarise, the health effects that concern the public are nonthermal health effects that the ANSI standard developed by electrical engineers does not protect the public against. If we want true protection from the health of microwave radiation exposure, we must look to qualified health professionals for it, not to electrical engineers. The same low-intensity radiation that electrical engineers claim is safe is actually the most hazardous to human health under conditions of chronic exposure -- just as the Soviet Union's top hygienist concluded in 1958! Microwave radiation is one of the most heavily studied environmental agents in the world, and many different types of ill health are associated with it. But the kinds of studies that would permit firm conclusions to be drawn in the face of the historical skepticism within the USA have not been done, probably because nobody in a position of political power in this country really wants to find out for certain that this radiation is hazardous! The public should insist on standards developed by qualified hygienists or health physicists, not on standards developed by electrical engineers. There is no guarantee at this time that such standards will be fully protective, but they are a step in the right direction.

Until this matter is settled, a proper attitude toward cellular telephone systems is to assume that there may be a hazard to the public health associated with this microwave radiation, and to act in a prudent manner under the assumption. Prudent action includes putting as great a distance as is feasible between microwave transmitters and human beings.

Whether it is safe to erect a cellular telephone base transmitter near a school building is a question that many communities in different countries have had to address recently. The nervous system of children is more susceptible to environmental insult that the nervous system of adults, because it is still growing and developing. It is certainly prudent to keep base transmitters as far away as possible from schools and other places where children congregate.

Perhaps I should mention that I am acquainted with John Moulder, a radiation biologist at the Medical College of Wisconsin who hosts a Web site on this issue. Dr. Moulder is an editor of Radiation Research who, when I talked with him several years ago, had satisfied himself that the public is hysterical about a lot of non-existent health problems associated with electromagnetic fields of all kinds. I am not aware that he is doing any research in this field.

I have never been willing to dismiss public concerns about the health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields of any kind so casually. Instead, I have felt that there were phenomena demanding an explanation, and -- unlike John Moulder -- I have spent many years working to discover that explanation. My first public opportunity to present my results will be at the 1999 annual meeting of the Biolelectromagnetics Society.

MAJORIE LUNDQUIST, PHD, CIH Plea to keep quiet April 9, 1999 Dear Sir, People who are born in the same place and grow up breathing the same air, sharing the same environment and enjoying the same environment and enjoying the same experience, naturally develop an inherent affinity towards each other. And so it is Mr. Editor, with people who are born in Bermuda! It doesn't matter if they're black, white or Portuguese, there is a unique and special cultural vibe between born Bermudians. And this vibe resonates in how deeply we feel about each other and our place of birth, the only place we can call home -- Bermuda! So I would urge all persons who were not born here, to please keep quiet on the issue of Independence and avoid getting their feelings hurt. Because frankly Mr. Editor, the question of Independence, simply, does not concern them! DR. CLARK GODWIN City of Hamilton Help needed in Bermuda April 12, 1999 Dear Sir, I read that a group have collected goods to send to the war-torn area and want about $4,000 to transport a container. How long will it take to get there? I believe it would be much better to collect for the wonderful Red Cross and give the money to them -- they can get it to headquarters quickly and they know the real needs and where.

We often hear that charity begins at home. Maybe that group could take up a cause that does not seem to be catered for and that is those all alone and temporary sick. No-one phones or pays a visit -- not even some of the old established churches. The long term sick may get a visit once a month from the pastor, PALS look after their sick.

I have been sick since February and I have not had a visit or a phone call.

The church I attended for up to 40 years did not even miss me from the Easter week services.

Perhaps the visitors experience this kind of unfriendliness and this may be another reason for our lack of visitors? Where is friendly Bermuda gone? CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME Devonshire