Cellphone antennas come at a cost
If it is truly necessary to expand coverage, let us find a site as far from homes and schools as possible.
In your April 25 article, “As landfill tower takes shape, cell focus shifts to Acton Center,” we are told that one Concordian “calls cellphones ‘life support.’” Police and fire officials are worried about the inability to make emergency calls, and business advocates dread dead zones. Regarding the wireless bylaw, Select Board chair Mary Hartman thinks “we need to go out back and shoot it.”
In 1997, Acton’s wireless bylaw was carefully constructed by concerned citizens and the Planning Board to prevent wireless carriers from siting facilities without restriction to protect the people of Acton. It gave the town the power to choose.
Wireless antennas at Emerson Umbrella would place an antenna within 200 feet of some homes on Devens, Hubbard, and Stow Streets; at Emerson Field children, whose brains are still developing, would be exposed to wireless radiation; at Acton-Carlisle High School students would be subject to more microwave radiation (than they receive from in-building Wi-Fi) while trying to learn. Trinitarian Church is surrounded by nursery schools and residences.
What’s really on the table? The density of microwave radiation required for data transmission, texting, and phone calls comes at a cost. Thousands of peer-reviewed studies show that microwave radiation (non-ionizing) has a deleterious effect on the human body, especially children’s small bodies.
Use this link to The Environmental Health Trust to learn more about wireless radiation and our health: ehtrust.org.
Perhaps business owners in town could hardwire their systems for data transmission which would free up capacity for emergency calls. Perhaps people could go back to landlines at home. If it is then truly necessary to expand coverage, let us find a site as far from homes and schools as possible. We have a choice.
Virginia Hines
The Valley Road
