Suicides Linked To Phone Masts In UK. (Cell Phone Towers)

A Dr, Coghill, member of a "government advisory committee" in the UK has gone on record, according to a newspaper there, linking the proximity of cell phone towers to deprssion that may have led to the suicide of 22 young people in South Wales.

www.express.co.uk...

His statement relates to the suicide deaths of 22 young people in Bridgend, South Wales. He claims to have "examined worldwide studies" showing there is a link between such deaths and the masts (towers). That all 22 lived "closer than average to the masts."

Does more reasearch need to be done? (And where's the reseaech he supposedly studied?) Dr. Coghill seems to think so. He says there is already a "body of research that has over the years pointed to the fact that exposure to mobile radiation can lead to depression."

With 70, 000 mobile phones and 50,000 masts on an island the size of the UK, it must be fairly easy to live near one it would seem to me. The newspaper article lists average living distances for the 22 cases, as oppossed to the average overall, and does seem to support the idea that these victims lived in close proximity to the towers.

Mention is made in the article, though nothing is cited there, of reasearch which "shows young people's brains are more suceptible to radio wave energy" and that "only two weeks ago a report identified mobiles as having an effect on sleep patterns."

I personally don't live in the UK, nor within miles of a cell phone tower, but I find this pretty scarey, if true. I also don't own or use a cell phone, as the idea of holding a portable microwave to my head several times a day ranks right up there with staring unprotected at a solar eclipses.

So do we, as a whole, have a reason for concern? What needs to be done to address this issue, as I'm sure most people don't want to give up constant contact? Where is the rest of the research about this? How should this and other data be interpreted?

[edit on 23-6-2008 by NGC2736]

This is interesting. I commented on mobile phone towers being a possible cause for strange behaviours and happenings in a fairly recent thread by MemoryShock. I wonder if the towers could be used maliciously somehow?

"Testing..."

Well, I'm going to bring up the Terra Papers again.

In Book 1, page 50, it says:

...the 'Farm' must not be disturbed. No one wants the 'Farm' destroyed. And, since its attending Beasts (Mankind) may stampede in the upcoming solar wars, and thus may cause destruction to the Farm, the Beast must be controlled.

Implanting a mind control device would be desirable, but unfortunately is highly impractical. If a control device in the brain is not feasible, then an external device placed in the immediate proximity of the brain is a viable alternative(.) But how can the Beast be fitted for and expected to carry the device...voluntarily? The Beast must be deceived.

On page 51, it continues:

* The human brain functions on electronic frequencies that are matched by only one device on the retail market today, a device called a cellular phone. Fait accompli!

Every day I find more and more that confirms what the Papers say.

The tread here on ATS is at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

And the Terra Papers can be reached directly though the link in my sig.

EDITED for typos...

[edit on 6/23/2008 by Amaterasu]

Cadbury, it is interesting that so many young people have so many problems, and they live on a cell phone. It would seem natural that different people would react in different ways. Some to depression, others to manic behahavior maybe???

And if someone were to use this maliciously, how much increase in power would it take to cause severe and extended damage?



Amaterasu, I keep intending to make time to have a read there, just because I've been hearing so much referenced from it. I'm not much on predictions, as such, but I'm game to give most things a fair shot to see how much sense they make in light of my own worldview. (A view I have changed more than once in my life.)

Dr Coghill's theory is quite neat & could explain a lot.

But there is one flaw in his thinking. The mobile companies only put masts where there's a population large enough to justify their expense. Towns & cities. Much of rural UK, especially Scotland (outside the central belt & east coast), has little if any network coverage at all.

You could argue that urban populations, with all the stresses & strains of modern life, have a higher suicide rate than rural communities. And instead of phone masts you could say that proximity to public libraries causes suicide ... or McDonald franchises.

It'd be interesting to examine suicide rates across the UK before & after the introduction of mobile phones. I'd suspect the geographic pattern would be similar.

reply to post by Niall197


That's why I've been looking for more data. He refered to a couple of studies, and some "worldwide data", but right now I seem to have one small crisis after another in RL, (dog out, sink stopped up, neighbor kids, the usual), so I can't concentrate enough to find anything.

But, if there is a basis to his concerns, then it's certainly worth the looking for.

Interesting thread....especially coupled with the ones about cell phones causing brain tumors and brain cancer.

Wasn't there some sort of flap about a decade ago about people suffering adverse effects as well living next door to giant power lines?

Is this caused from the same thing as living by huge power lines as well? And why is it just cell phones I wonder, and not cordless phones as well? Anyone know?

I don't live near any of the towers either...if all of these studies or hypotheses are correct, there's going to be mayhem and mass suing, well here in the States that is.

If you think of all the different kind of waves, all around us, bombarding us daily, it's a wonder anyone lives to be 30.

Hello there NG.

Tetra.

Ever heard of it ? Police and emergency radio system. Operates very closely to the human brain frequencies.

Problem is the cancer rates and other 'strange' occurences surrounding its daily use are really scary.

Ill go dig up the tetra link for you. Why do i say this / because its beamed through normal phone masts - they don't actually have to tell any one there is a tetra siganl relay there either due to its sensitivity to 'terrorism'.

Sir William Stewart, the former chief scientific adviser to the government, said in a report on mobile phone health concerns that frequencies around 16Hz - close to Tetra's 17.6Hz - should be avoided because previous research suggested they could cause potentially harmful changes in cell biology. However, Professor Colin Blakemore of Oxford University and chief executive of the Medical Research Council, has dismissed the health concerns surrounding Tetra.

uhhh uhh.... thats being pumped around these relays as well. a nasty witches brew.tetra Pdf


and have a read of this...protester pulling down masts because of a cancer cluster... and other nasty illnesses.

mobile mast pulled down


[edit on 23-6-2008 by Dan Tanna]

here you go my good friend.


Dr Roger Coghill

My wife told me the addy

more TETRA info

www.tetrawatch.net...

here is a site that shows you where mobile masts are , including TETRA sites, just zoom in on the map for info.
UK only..

www.sitefinder.ofcom.org.uk...

[edit on 23-6-2008 by beefeater]

Originally posted by NGC2736
Amaterasu, I keep intending to make time to have a read there, just because I've been hearing so much referenced from it. I'm not much on predictions, as such, but I'm game to give most things a fair shot to see how much sense they make in light of my own worldview. (A view I have changed more than once in my life.)

Just be aware that when you first start reading, it will seem like so much science fiction. I nearly quit reading, but at about page 45, it all comes home.

Keep reading, and on page 19 of the thread, I posted a glossary which makes following it all easier.

Thanks!

LateAppexer, interesting isn't the word for it. Maybe I should have put "OMG" or "Shocking" in the header. I had no idea this might, and I readily admit, might be such a potentially dangerous problem. But the risk is worth taking a very close look at.

Read what Dan Tanna and beefeater link to. We may just be starting to get to the picture here.



Dan Tanna, those are some excellent links. I've only had time to skim a bit, but will plunge into everything later. I did note that the cell phone industry funded a study wich they claim showed everything fine and dandy. Yet, five days later a study for the International Journal of Oncology found an entirely different result.

It reminds me of the tobbacco industry not long ago.



beefeater, I'm slowly working on all the links, thanks for adding more resources. The one showing locations of these towers/masts should be of great interest to everyone living in the UK. It must be chilling to read this stuff, and I've barely started, and then see you live near one of these.



Folks, maybe we ought to FLAG this to make people aware. We're off to a great start, but the more people looking at this, the more we might learn. This has the potential, should it prove true, to be a very important thread, considering that there are likely more cell phone users than ciggerette smokers.

Originally posted by NGC2736
Cadbury, it is interesting that so many young people have so many problems, and they live on a cell phone. It would seem natural that different people would react in different ways. Some to depression, others to manic behahavior maybe???

That does indeed sound reasonable, but I'm just really not sure. One thing I do know for sure is there was something really strange about those suicides.

And if someone were to use this maliciously, how much increase in power would it take to cause severe and extended damage?

Good question. I honestly don't have an answer. Depending on what you mean by severe and extended damage, would there necessarily have to be much of an increase in power -- if even any increase at all? I really don't know what they're capable of doing or how much juice they'd need to do it.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by Cadbury]

reply to post by Cadbury


I don't have answers either, just more and more questions piling up in my head. I started this thread with an "Isn't that interesting" attitude. I noticed it because I have always had an unreasonable (according to the rest of my family) dislike for cell phone technology.

But the more I find, the scarier this seems. My daughter and grankids live damn near in the shadow of one. And at ten and under, this is worrisome.

Originally posted by NGC2736
I don't have answers either, just more and more questions piling up in my head. I started this thread with an "Isn't that interesting" attitude. I noticed it because I have always had an unreasonable (according to the rest of my family) dislike for cell phone technology.

I share your disdain for the mobile hand-phone. I'd recommend taking the battery out at all times, but the trouble is they don't work if you do that.

But the more I find, the scarier this seems. My daughter and grankids live damn near in the shadow of one. And at ten and under, this is worrisome.

I'm not exactly sure how dangerous these towers really are but if the article you've provided has any accuracy to it, then it could be a cause for concern. I suppose crashing a plane into it is out of the question?

reply to post by Cadbury


Some of those limks Dan Tanna put up have some interesting reading. It appears that concern is growing, even here in the states. In France there is a lot of concern:

Cardis was responding to an "Appeal" for caution in the use of mobile phones, issued last Sunday, June 15, by 20 cancer and public health specialists in the Journal du Dimanche, another well-read newspaper. Among the 20 are Henri Pujol, a past president of the La Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, the French counterpart to the American Cancer Society, and Annie Sasco, a former head of epidemiology for cancer prevention at IARC. The Appeal received widespread coverage in the French media —so much so that it prompted the French National Academy of Medicine to issue a "clarification" yesterday in an effort to quell the growing public controversy. The academy stated that the results of the Interphone study that had been published so far are "reassuring" and, in a jab at the group of 20, reminded everyone that medicine is not about advertising or marketing

www.microwavenews.com...

When this type of high profile group, as it says - counterpart to the American Cancer Society, starts taking something like this seriously, and issuing an appeal for caution, then it is something to pay attention to.

Strangely, or not, there's very little notice I have found on the MSM about this. Usually they play the fear factor. By not doing so, it makes one wonder if this is being stifled in the US. Cell phones are so much a part of life nowdays, and such Big Business, I wouldn't be surprised.

These links are really worth getting into.



[edit on 24-6-2008 by NGC2736]

As a wee bit of interesting reading on the history of this topic:

www.erowid.org...

I was not aware that this had been studied as a means of mental manipulation for so long. Nor had I been aware that it was an area of interest for Tesla.

This might put a conspiracy spin of a different nature on this for some folks.

I am fully willing and intend to write this off to statistical aberration(I.E. if you look hard enough for a connection you will find one) until more studies show a higher correlation percentage.

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
I am fully willing and intend to write this off to statistical aberration (I.E. if you look hard enough for a connection you will find one) until more studies show a higher correlation percentage.

quite!

the transmitter towers are a Vortex of Controversy... created & fanned by those with a ulterior motive or just preying on others' fear of the unknown.


an interest component could be that on Friday the 20th,
two days before the article became a published piece...

the AMT (American Tower corp) on the NYSE, suddenly dropped in price, and the following Mon & Tues continued its price decline to exceed $2 per share (falling from $44 to $42)...
now this might be an ongoing attempt at manipulating the AMT market,
with early proofreaders leaking the alarming article that associates suicides and cell-phone transmitter towers.
So the inside info people could sell short before the article hit the media and stand to gain as the price returned to normal after the initial scare subsided.


profits on the way down and profits on calls on the way up...