“It does cause harm,” says an expert at a La Jolla Town Council forum to address the proposed tower, which has garnered much opposition in recent weeks.
In a room of more than 200, no one voiced support for a 5G wireless tower proposed for the La Jolla Bike Path.
Instead, many signed a petition, wrote postcards deliverable to San City City Council President Joe LaCava and listened to others raise strong opposition to the project at a Feb 13 forum hosted by La Jolla Town Council and the Save the La Jolla Bike Path Coalition.
Outside, parents and children held signs and chanted in the rain to voice their concerns.
The tower, brought forth by AT&T, would be a 30-foot, standalone wireless communication facility with a roof and would consist of nine panel antennas, nine remote radio units and ancillary equipment for support to the facility, including a 250-foot enclosure with equipment cabinet and a diesel generator.
The facility would be constructed at 6201-6303 La Jolla bike path, a few yards from the intersection with Via Del Norte in an area of dirt normally accessed by children on bikes and others for recreational purposes.
Concerns have been raised at multiple community meetings previously, as the tower would be 100 to 750 feet from private residences, a senior care facility, a park and a preschool.
It’s a concern that last summer caused similar uproar, as Dish Wireless applied for a similar facility on a building next to Stella Maris Academy.
The building’s owner has since “rescinded the agreement with Dish, and there has been no activity whatsoever,” Stella Maris Principal Jamie Brandt said at the forum to applause. “We’re very happy.”
Having a tower near a school is “not a good idea,” said Kent Chamberlin, professor and chair emeritus in electrical and computer engineering at the University of New Hampshire.
Chamberlin is part of the 2020 New Hampshire State Commission on 5G Health and Environment that recommended cell towers have a 1,640-foot setback, something neither the Stella Maris nor the bike path proposals have.
Chamberlin, with years of research experience on wireless radiation, said radiation’s effects are “not like a death ray, … but over time, it does cause harm.”
About 250 studies in peer-reviewed publications showed the mechanism that causes harm from wireless radiation is oxidative stress, an imbalance of free radicals and antioxidants.
“Oxidative stress can lead to chronic inflammation, and chronic inflammation leads to a host of diseases,” Chamberlin said, including cancer, diabetes, reproductive issues, chromosome damage and neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s.
Alzheimer’s death rates nationwide have more than doubled from 2000 to 2020, Chamberlin noted.
“I’m not claiming that wireless radiation exposure is completely responsible for this, but it’s certainly a factor,” he said.
Similarly the prevalence of diabetes, Parkinson’s and other diseases spiked considerably from 2004 to 2012, correlating with the rapid rise of smartphones and other wireless devices.
“There’s an association between greater exposure to wireless radiation” and these diseases, he said.
Chamberlin cited a 2004 study of six California firefighters who spent up to 90 hours per week in fire stations located near wireless towers installed 1999: In five years, the “previously healthy men” began suffering from severe neurological symptoms, including headaches, fatigue, insomnia, memory loss, confusion, nausea, weakness and memory lapses, including forgetting basic CPR.
There are similar studies with similar results repeated globally, he said.
The dangers of wireless radiation “are very real, but the industry is keeping that secret from us” due to profits, Chamberlin said.
“The only people who claim there’s not a problem with wireless radiation exposure are those with some affiliation to the wireless industry who have something to gain from it,” he said.
The proposed La Jolla bike path tower is “absolutely in contradiction to” the research and recommendations, Chamberlin said.
Representatives of the Save the La Jolla Bike Path Coalition ask for support.
What can be done? “In every case that I’ve seen, there are places to put a tower and you get great coverage, but you don’t overly expose people,” he said.
But that kind of movement and antennae positioning often costs more, he said, which is less desirable for telecommunications companies.
With regard to Federal Communications Commision guidelines that allow this, Chamberlin said the FCC’s numbers are based on research with animals, and “were only based upon heating effects … that cause problems [and] the level at which you cause burns.”
The FFC’s research also focused on short-term exposure, but it’s the long-term exposure people need to worry about, he said.
“Only together will our voice be heard,” Garay said.
The tower application goes to the La Jolla Development Permit Review Committee for review and approval; the item has not yet been scheduled.
© lajolla.ca
