Safety code 6 standards inadequate
Email
Print
Letter to Editor
Share
Updated: July 15, 2009 12:03 PM
Dear Editor:
Both Mayor Perrino and Telus have stated that the proposed cellular tower to be installed within a few hundred metres of homes and schools conform to Health Canada’s Safety Code 6.
This is the mantra used by both politicians and industry to defend their decisions to install these ultra-high frequency electromagnetic fields close to where people live.
Safety Code 6 was established in 1999 and has not been amended since that time.
It is based on preventing damage to human tissue due to the well-understood heating effects of Radio Frequency thermal effects, which are short-term thermal effects.
Health Canada has never conducted research into the long-term effects of continued exposure to non-thermal rates of radiation — the type of radiation to be emitted by the tower proposed for our community.
For Ms. Perrino to cite this Safety Code does not adequately address the concerns of parents who send their children to nearby schools, or to families who live within the vicinity of the tower.
In France, Great Britain, Taiwan, Israel, and several other countries around the world, the standards of safety are much higher than in Canada and are based on the most recent scientific studies.
Furthermore, once installed in these countries, the levels of electromagnetic radiation are monitored.
There is no provision in Canada requiring that Industries monitor their output of radiation — industry can increase the output without approval from anyone.
Ms. Perrino, by blindly approving of this tower in our neighborhoods, you are subjecting the people of Summerland to higher levels of radiation. You cannot use Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 to defend your decision — it is an outdated and inadequate code that only serves to allow industry to continue installing these ultra-high radioactive frequencies throughout Canada.
Leslie Kemp
Summerland
v2
