War over iBurst tower erupts

Do you think staying close to a cellular/wireless mast adversely affects your health?

  • Yes

    Votes: 83 36.4%
  • No

    Votes: 101 44.3%
  • Uncertain

    Votes: 44 19.3%

  • Total voters
    228

rpm

Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jul 22, 2003
Messages
66,758
War over iBurst tower

The race is on to establish whether iBurst tower causes health problems as alleged by residents
 

Attachments

  • iBurst letter.pdf
    165.3 KB · Views: 2,251
Tracy`s lack of real evidence makes me really suspicious.

It doesnt take a genius to take the people who are suffering from these alleged ailments to a real doctor and get affidavits confirming the "rash`s" these people are suffering from are caused by radiation burns and not some kinda bacteria problem. Isnt it that easy?

I cant look at her with any credibility without any real empirical evidence instead of the anecdotal evidence that is currently on the plate.

Why have not the thousands of other towers around the country not had the same effect on its people? (Big question).

Also, I dont like the poll, the technologies used in the Iburst towers and cellular towers are different.

Pictures of rash`s is nothing but evidence that people in that area are getting rash`s. The tower seems like a good scapegoat when there could be a bigger problem. Surely a doctor can study these rash`s and confirm if they are toxic, bacterial or radiation in nature?
 
Last edited:
I'm more inclined to suspect that one of the neighbours, in these troubled times, has taken to incinerating toxic waste in their back garden to make ends meet.
 
Given the choice of a home in the shadow of a wireless tower and a home far away from one, I'd choose the latter. Regardless of evidence.
 
Probably a localized problem...maybe just some pollen everyone there is allergic to...
 
Given the choice of a home in the shadow of a wireless tower and a home far away from one, I'd choose the latter. Regardless of evidence.

Same, I am not a fan of any wireless tower. I still think there is more to wireless than we know.
 
Yes 12 44.44%
No 10 37.04%
Uncertain 5 18.52%

Interesting result so far...
 
Given the choice of a home in the shadow of a wireless tower and a home far away from one, I'd choose the latter. Regardless of evidence.
I tend to agree. I don't think I will be to happy if I camped out to close to a tower.

Looking at the article and the figures that were reported to be measured, it does seem to be very low. I believe the EU to be very stringent in their "policing" of this type of incident and a culture to sue is much more likely to be found over there.

The reported figures are no where near the maximum level allowed and furthermore there seem to be a lot of unconfirmed incidents and no evidence actually linking anything to the tower.

Maybe they watched to much Carte Blanch, who knows, but if I stayed close to such a tower I would put my family first and would also not trust a tower and join a cause to have it removed. That is just human.

On the other side it does seem that Iburst are reacting positive towards the community and are giving them every opportunity to proof any of their complaints, suggesting that they are confident that the tower does not present any health risk to the residents.

Not sure if this will ever be resolved. There has been problems around that tower almost from the very beginning.
 
Last edited:
I tend to agree. I don't think I will be to happy if I camped out to close to a tower.

Looking at the article and the figures that were reported to be measured, it does seem to be very low. I believe the EU to be very stringent in their "policing" of this type of incident and a culture to sue is much more likely to be found over there.

The reported figures are no where near the maximum level allowed and furthermore there seem to be a lot of unconfirmed incidents and no evidence actually linking anything to the tower.

Maybe they watched to much Carte Blanch, who knows, but if I stayed close to such a tower I would put my family first and would also not trust a tower and join a cause to have it removed. That is just human.

On the other side it does seem that Iburst are reacting positive towards the community and are giving them every opportunity to proof any of their complaints, suggesting that they are confident that the tower does not present any health risk to the residents.

Not sure if this will ever be resolved. There has been problems around that tower almost from the very beginning.



The whole story seems a bit too much. Sounds to me like a few people upset about the tower making up stories about health issues. The rash break outs could be anything, even contaminated water in the area.
 
Personally I would like more information re. the environmental process followed by Le Hanie in this instance.
 
These are just some written words that reach us at the end of the day & in this country it seems to be the norm to pass off dribble as evidence.

I would say yes I think it would definitely affect your health living next to a tower of that nature purely because there is without a doubt Non-Ionizing Radiation emitting from the device regardless of the levels.....

Funny thing though that highlighted the point of an independent company taking level readings......can't they do it themselves & should that be doubted the community should find someone to take the readings, that's a little more independent than the managers cousin playing with sitcks....

I'm sure speaking to a local doctor would also verify whether there has been an increase in problems since........
 
:erm: AFAIK all the residents in the IMMEDIATE vicinity are dead??? :D

IIRC there are other towers nearby that are pumping out stronger signals than the iBurst one? Are they also being targeted?
 
quitely switch the tower on again for a week or so and then see if anything happens, most likely nothing will.
 
The whole story seems a bit too much. Sounds to me like a few people upset about the tower making up stories about health issues. The rash break outs could be anything, even contaminated water in the area.

If you are getting a rash (damaged skin cells) from 'radiation' from the tower then I'm afriad you should be throwing up, feeling tired and will have a good chance of dying within 30days.

These allegations made towards iburst are serious ones. if the residents were really concerned, and know about radiation poisoning, they wouldn't be returning there anytime soon.

What are the iburst speeds like next to the tower?

Not so good since they turned it off yesterday :(
 
Last edited:
I recall about 4 years back when I very first started using a blue-tooth dongle to connect pc to the internet via cellphone everytime I connected via this method I would immediately get a headache. It is only after frequent use that my body eventually adapted and got used to it that is when my headaches eventually subsided. If I recall that these blue-tooth dongles used to have a frequency of 2.4Ghz so one can only imagine how the tower affects these pepople currenlty until their bodys too eventually adapt to it.
 
Regardless of whether there is any actual physical harm being generated by these towers, this must be doing some serious damage to iBurst's reputation.

As to whether there is any material fact in these towers emitting harmful rays (?), one has to wonder about the old saying, where there's smoke there is usually fire.
 
If you are getting a rash (damaged skin cells) from 'radiation' from the tower then I'm afriad you should be throwing up, feeling tired and will have a good chance of dying within 30days.

These allegations made towards iburst are serious ones. if the residents were really concerned, and know about radiation poisoning, they wouldn't be returning there anytime soon.



Not so good since they turned it off yesterday :(

Does this mean the tower went Limp Bizkit :D
 
Back
Top