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
I am getting a lot of flak for my sentiments, so I am going to put it to the good people of MyBB, iBurst and Craigavon where I stand today!

RF engineering is a very difficult subject. As an engineer with almost 15 years of experience, I have only moderately mastered all of the aspects of it. It has not been my field, but now that digital has converged with wireless I have been forced to gain experience in RF design as my products need to include wireless... I happen to have played a lot with iBurst and I know a hell of a lot about their network, the basestations and the modems, but it is experiential knowledge, from extensively working with the product. None of the sites I have worked with, have made anyone sick...

I refuse to take any sides and some people are now going to get angry with me, so be it!

iBurst maintains they followed the procedures, and it is now clear a misunderstaing occurred regarding the erection of the site. Enviro is not my game, I know zilch about it.

The residents claim the tower is making them ill. Really slim chance, but it is possible that this is indeed the case, although I believe this to be a very small possibility, if you look at the emissions levels iBurst quoted in their press release, those levels are very low. There could be stuff in those residents' homes radiating far higher levels of EMI than that due to interference, or whatnot. It could even be someone has a faulty alarm system which is being affected by the iBurst signal and going bonkers...

I have personally been called to investigate a situation where wireless remote controls stopped working in a particular suburb, near Randburg, and what I found there, makes me wonder if this is not what is happening in this case. What happened was, a new Wi-Fi site went up, and caused an alarm system repeater radio to go totally bonkers, swamping the area with wide band RF emissions. Nobody got sick, but high drama, frustration, anger and conspiracy theories abounded. It also happened in Roodepoort, you can go and look it up for yourself, it was covered in the local news.

We all know the iBurst signal is attenuated easily- ask any subscriber who has had problems and I am sure Shaun Green will attest to it.

RF doesn't make me sick but that's just me. There could be other environmental issues at play here....

On the side of the residents, I understand they're upset, but I also think they need to start working with iBurst, who has come across to me as very accommodating. I've never seen a service provider provide accomodations to allow residents access to the mast and to pay for an engineer to come out to site. I am sure this is costing iBurst a fortune in lost revenue with a site being down... A lot of people there really need iBurst badly as I remember from several years ago it was a real problem getting a Telkom line for ADSL in Fourways. This would explain the need for another Basestation. I know what it is like being forced to use iBurst because of no other alternatives being available. All thanks to yours truly, Telkom!

As for the protesting with posters, and whatnot. I only learnt of that this morning and I feel it is taking things too far. If iBurst are agreeing to work to resolve the matter, is it necessary to go that far? Democracy or not, I don't think the behaviours shown now are appropriate. This thing should have been resolved?

Another thing which also worries me about the illness story is, why has nobody gotten sick, or "fried" or gotten cancer, in Kempton Park yet? How many reisdents live close to those airport radars pumping out kilowatts of microwave energy? I know from personal experience those radars interfere with iBurst modems as the frequencies are very close, I had such a problem in Jet Park with a client in 2007. I can tell you, lots of people live in the near vicinity of OR Tambo. I've been there at least once to solve interference problems with gate motors! I also believe it affects cars with electronic fuel injection... from time to time but people shrug it off as being a temporary thing!

To be honest here, I don't like iBurst for a totally unrelated reason, but, considering their willingness to work with these people, I have more respect for them than I did yesterday!
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...e-use-linked-brain-tumours-10-year-study.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/31/s...-tumors-is-drawing-attention-and-concern.html

Scientists emphasize that there is by no means an epidemic of brain cancer. They say the incidence of brain cancer remains very low for the population as a whole, accounting for about 1.5 percent of all malignancies. For most age groups, the rate of the two most common and deadly brain tumors, the gliomas and the astrocytomas, has been relatively stable for at least 20 years.

Experts stress that trends in brain cancer are especially difficult to sort out, largely because the technology for diagnosing brain tumors has sharply improved over the last 15 years. With the aid of advanced imaging methods like CAT scans and magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, doctors are now able to diagnose brain cancers that in the past might have mistakenly been described as strokes, senile dementia or other neurological disorders.

''If we agree that we are diagnosing a greater number of patients with brain tumors than before, a lot of that could be explained by the increased sensitivity of diagnostic tools,'' said Dr. Edward H. Oldfield, chief of surgical neurology at the National Institute of Neurolgical Disorders and Stroke. ''When the CAT scan was introduced in the early 70's there was a big jump in the detection of brain tumors, and the MRI has an even greater sensitivity for detecting small tumors.''

Studies Track Increase

Yet recent studies indicate that certain patterns in brain cancer trends cannot be dismissed as a result superior diagnosis.

In one study, a new analysis of data collected by the National Cancer Institute's nationwide cancer surveillance program, researchers at the National Institute on Aging in Bethesda, Md., have determined that among people over the age of 75, the incidence of brain tumorsmore than doubled from 1968 to 1985, the last year for which statistics are available. For people over 80, the rate of increase was even more shocking, soaring by 300 percent to 400 percent over the 17-year period, or by as much as 23 percent a year. ''Better diagnosis can explain some of the rise,'' said Dr. Stanley I. Rapoport, chief of the laboratory of neuroscience at the Institute and the main author of the new report, which is to be published in The Journal of the National Cancer Institute. ''But something else is going on as well. Brain cancer in the elderly deserves more attention.''

Further confirming the Rapoport results, scientists at the National Research Council in Washington, the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and other institutions recently compared mortality figures from about 1968 to 1987 for the United States, Britain, Italy, France, West Germany and Japan. They found that among people 65 and older, deaths from brain tumors rose in all nations at up to 200 percent for the period.

''There's a stunning increase in mortality'' from brain tumors, said Dr. Devra Lee Davis, an author of the paper, which is to appear in the December issue of The American Journal of Industrial Medicine. ''It holds true for all countries, a very sharp increase in a relatively short period of time.''
Click to expand...
Long-term mobile phone use 'significantly increases risk' of brain tumours, landmark study finds

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 6:15 PM on 30th October 2009

* Comments (46)
* Add to My Stories

mobile

Study: People who used mobiles for a decade or more had a 'significantly increased risk' of developing tumours

Long-term mobile phone use could increase the risk of developing cancer, according to a decade-long landmark study.

The investigation by the World Health Organisation analysed studies of 12,800 people in 13 countries.

It found people who used mobiles for a decade or more had a 'significantly increased risk' of developing some types of brain tumours.

Six of the eight Interphone studies found an increased risk of glioma - the most common brain tumour - among mobile phone users, according to The Daily Telegraph.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...rain-tumours-10-year-study.html#ixzz0XNvJVYQb
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Kei said:
For the record:

that site transmits roughly 20 watts into the air, in the 1.7 ~ 1.9GHz range. The info is on Kyocera's website you can confirm that for yourself. Depending on antenna gain the ERP could be higher. I don't know. I have never had the opportunity to get down with iBurst's equipment.
Click to expand...

I am no engineer so correct me if something I say is incorrect.

Are these people in this article talking about radiation of radio waves from the tower or electromagnetic radiation from the tower?

Surely if they are arguing about electromagnetic radiation then a household microwave (especially considering the proximity of said microwave and the fact that some microwaves can pull over a kilowatt and that those magnetrons are not very specific as to the frequencies they push out) would allow a human being to absorb far more electromagnetic radiation than the iBurst tower would?
 
Last edited:
icyrus said:
Radio waves are electromagnetic radiation.
Click to expand...

True, but not all electromagnetic radiation can be classified as radio waves, sorry that I didn't express the question properly. Perhaps if I had written "radio waves in particular or electromagnetic radiation in general" it would have removed confusion. AFAIK (could be wrong) microwave ovens do not produce radio waves, but still push out a lot of electromagnetic radiation.

I apologise for any ambiguity. Hopefully now you understand my question.
 
Last edited:
If IBurst really did not comply with the correct implementation procedure, then I expect IBurst to immediately stop their current approach, and to re-start the correct implementation procedure.

The correct procedure is for IBurst to publish their intentions, and then to allow time for objections.

Why are IBurst deflecting (ignoring) that part of the community's claims?
 
davemc said:
If IBurst really did not comply with the correct implementation procedure, then I expect IBurst to immediately stop their current approach, and to re-start the correct implementation procedure.

The correct procedure is for IBurst to publish their intentions, and then to allow time for objections.

Why are IBurst deflecting (ignoring) that part of the community's claims?
Click to expand...

From what I can gather iBurst have addressed this issue repeatedly. There is a long thread on this forum about the issue already.
 
icyrus said:
From what I can gather iBurst have addressed this issue repeatedly. There is a long thread on this forum about the issue already.
Click to expand...
I am familiar with that thread, and I seem to recall that there was some kind of botch up with that, or that none of the current community members were actually around when the notice was posted, as the area was still being developed.

I don't want to sift through that thread now, but, a clarifying statement with facts from IBurst would be appreciated.
 
What is Debbie Love's (aka Debbie2) involvement in this debacle, and why was the list of RF engineers past on to her?
 
I'm willing to give this lady R10,000 CASH if she passes a double blind test in telling me when a tower is on or off. South Africa needs a James Randi, Penn n Teller, aka BS debunker.
 
This lady is being ridiculous now :p they need to get the water they drink in that area checked :D the only problem that tower might inflict to the residents is space. i also wouldnt be happy to have a tower in my back yard unless i 1. get paid a substantial amount 2. uncapped fast internet 3. half of Jannie's company (Omnisol) :D
 
Ok, I didn't bother to read the article and also didn't bother to read through all the posts since there are a few that is quite long. But what I do know is this:

Where I live there is a Vodacom tower on the same piece of land on which out building is built, leaving me about 100m away from the tower. From the details in the letter from iBurst, and from the allegations in the letter by the resident, I should be half dead by now since I am staying at the same place for the last 5 years and the VC tower has been standing there since I moved in and it is operational.

What I can however say is that the 2 trees that was standing about 5m away from the tower died about 4 years ago, and it was big trees. trees standing a bit further away are doing fine and me and my neighbours are doing 100% fine.

I think this might be some personal thing that the resident has got against the tower itself and not the radiation from the tower.

my 2c's
 
MielieSpoor said:
Ok, I didn't bother to read the article and also didn't bother to read through all the posts since there are a few that is quite long. But what I do know is this:

Where I live there is a Vodacom tower on the same piece of land on which out building is built, leaving me about 100m away from the tower. From the details in the letter from iBurst, and from the allegations in the letter by the resident, I should be half dead by now since I am staying at the same place for the last 5 years and the VC tower has been standing there since I moved in and it is operational.

What I can however say is that the 2 trees that was standing about 5m away from the tower died about 4 years ago, and it was big trees. trees standing a bit further away are doing fine and me and my neighbours are doing 100% fine.

I think this might be some personal thing that the resident has got against the tower itself and not the radiation from the tower.

my 2c's
Click to expand...

Its exactly this thats doesn't make any sense to me. There must be at least 3x more VC & MTN towers than iburst towers and ive never heard or read about any complaints from people getting sick from them.:confused:
 
MielieSpoor said:
Ok, I didn't bother to read the article and also didn't bother to read through all the posts since there are a few that is quite long. But what I do know is this:

Where I live there is a Vodacom tower on the same piece of land on which out building is built, leaving me about 100m away from the tower. From the details in the letter from iBurst, and from the allegations in the letter by the resident, I should be half dead by now since I am staying at the same place for the last 5 years and the VC tower has been standing there since I moved in and it is operational.

What I can however say is that the 2 trees that was standing about 5m away from the tower died about 4 years ago, and it was big trees. trees standing a bit further away are doing fine and me and my neighbours are doing 100% fine.

I think this might be some personal thing that the resident has got against the tower itself and not the radiation from the tower.

my 2c's
Click to expand...
Apart from the silly "half dead" comment, I ask you why do you think the trees died?
 
maybe the trees weren't getting water? Seriously now, if you as a resident with these complaints don't even take the time to respond to the press properly or 'constantly' have email problems, then well, not much more anyone else can do for you.. Something smells funny bout this story to be honest.
 
cmon get a life. Does this lady not have anything better to do with her time. They should have just asked iBurst to make the tower look pretty or something (that seems to be the only issue here)
 
should be interesting to see what the final verdict will be - but as one poster stated, look at the picture as a whole - surely there are other (older) towers with trees and foliage nearby, but without any apparent damage to foliage/shrubbery/trees etc?

can point you to tsitsikamma toll plaza - there is a tower almost next to the toll road, amongst a couple of trees, and the trees still are doing fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X