Cell towers emit a type of radiation.

Cell towers have wireless antennas that emit radio frequency (RF) non-ionizing radiation. When these antennas are close to our homes and schools, our daily exposure to RF radiation is increased. RF radiation is considered a new form of environmental pollution.

Effects from RF documented in scientific research include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, headaches, sleep issues, genetic damage, changes to the reproductive system, memory deficits, and impacts to the nervous system.

Research has found that the cumulative dose from cell tower RF can result in significant exposure over time. Young children do not use cell phones, yet they are involuntarily exposed.  Cell tower radiation exposures are nonstop day and night. We can turn our cell phones off, but we cannot turn a cell tower off.

Children are more vulnerable.

Children are more vulnerable to RF radiation as they absorb it deeper into their brains and bodies. 

Even if the radiation absorption were the same as in adults, the effects in children can be far more serious.  A child’s developing brain and organ systems are more sensitive to environmental stressors. 

Scientists recommend children’s exposure to this type of radiation be reduced.

Hundreds of scientists are urging that our exposure to cell towers, cell phones, and other wireless radiation emissions be reduced due to the scientific evidence showing effects at legally allowable levels. These scientists have written letters to schools and lawmakers  urging that children and the public be protected. They have joined in numerous scientific appeals to governments and insitutions calling for action to strengten safety limits.

Published peer-reviewed science has linked cell tower radiation to harmful effects.

Researchers have studied cell towers and cell tower radiation for decades.  Many biological effects have been documented at very low intensities comparable to what people might experience within 500 feet of a cell tower. The majority of research studies have found effects. 

However, industry and industry-funded scientific groups dismiss these studies.

THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS

The American Academy of Pediatrics Healthy Child webpage states:

Electromagnetic Fields: A Hazard to Your Health?

“In recent years, concern has increased about exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic radiation emitted from cell phones and phone station antennae. An Egyptian study confirmed concerns that living nearby mobile phone base stations increased the risk of developing:

• Headaches
• Memory problems
• Dizziness
• Depression
• Sleep problems

Short-term exposure to these fields in experimental studies have not always shown negative effects, but this does not rule out cumulative damage from these fields, so larger studies over longer periods are needed to help understand who is at risk. In large studies, an association has been observed between symptoms and exposure to these fields in the everyday environment.”

A review entitled “Evidence for a health risk by RF on humans living around mobile phone base stations: From radiofrequency sickness to cancerreviewed the existing scientific literature and found radiofrequency sickness, cancer and changes in biochemical parameters (Balmori 2022).

• In 2011, wireless radio frequency radiation was classified as a Class 2B possible carcinogen by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. Between then and now, the published peer-reviewed scientific evidence has significantly increased. Falcioni 2018 published in Environmental Research exposed rats to RF comparable to cell tower RF levels and found increased cancers. Now, many scientists are of the opinion that the weight of current peer-reviewed evidence supports the conclusion that radiofrequency radiation should be regarded as a human carcinogen (Hardell and Carlberg 2017, Peleg et al, 2018, Miller et al 2018).
• Zothansiama 2017 published in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine found  changes in blood considered biomarkers predictive of cancer in people living closer to cell arrays. 
• Rodrigues 2021 published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found higher exposure to cell arrays linked to higher mortality from all cancer and specifically lung and breast cancer.
• Meo 2018  published in American Journal of Men’s Health linked higher cell tower exposures to delayed fine and gross motor skills, spatial working memory, and attention in school adolescents
• Yakymenko 2011 published in Exp Oncology found increased of cancer incidence.  
• Meo 2015  published in Environmental Research and Public Health found  higher exposures linked to higher risk of type 2 diabetes. 
• López 2021 published in Environmental Research linked higher exposures to more severe headaches and decreased sleep 
• Levitt 2010 published in Environmental Reviews analyzed 100 studies and found ~80% showed biological effects near towers. (PDF)
• Yakymenko 2015 published in Electromagnetic Biology Medicine reviewed 100 studies and showed oxidative effects of low-intensity RF radiation. 
• Buchner 2011 published in Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaf and detailed in Oncology Letters  followed people in a German town after a cell tower was erected and found stress hormones adrenaline and noradrenaline significantly increased over the first 6 months after the antenna activation and decreased dopamine and PEA levels after 18 months. 
• Dode 2011 published in Science of the Total Environment 10 year study on cell phone antennas by the local Municipal Health Department and several universities in Brazil found a clearly elevated relative risk of cancer mortality at residential distances of 500 meters or less from cell phone towers.  
• Khurana 2011 published in International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health reviewed epidemiological studies and found in 80% of the studies, people living <500 m from base stations had an increased adverse neuro-behavioral symptoms and cancer. 
• Two published case reports document illness that developed after 5G antennas were installed. In “The Microwave Syndrome after Installation of 5G Emphasizes the Need for Protection from Radiofrequency Radiation” (Hardell and Nilsson 2023),  a man and woman developed microwave syndrome symptoms (e.g., neurological symptoms, tinnitus, fatigue, insomnia,  emotional distress, skin disorders, and blood pressure variability) after a 5G base station was installed on the roof above their apartment. Similarly, in “Development of the Microwave Syndrome in Two Men Shortly after Installation of 5G on the Roof above their Office”  two men developed symptoms after 5G antennas were activated on the roof of their workplace. The symptoms disappeared in both men within a couple of weeks (case 1) or immediately (case 2) after leaving the office.
• Surveys of people living near cell tower antennas in France, Spain, Iraq, India, Germany, Egypt, Poland have found significantly higher reports of health issues including sleep issues, fatigue and headaches (See Santini et al. 2003, López 2021, Alazawi 2011, Pachuau and Pachuaua 2016, Eger et al. 2004,  Abdel-Rassoul et al. 2007, Bortkiewicz et al., 2004). 

School cell towers are plagued by transparency issues.

The cell tower application process tends to be plagued by transparency issues. Too often, people find out a cell tower is coming and think they have no way to stop it. However, many families find that when they investigate the way the cell tower application moved though the process, there are numerous mistakes made by the cell tower companies and decision maker who rubber stamp the permits with very little oversight.

People were given no or little notice and there was no environmental review. 

Regulatory “safety” limits are not protective.

Hundreds of scientists have evaluated the cell tower RF radiation exposure limits of the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the International Commission for Non-ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and found the limits are decades outdated and not protective to the health of the public, especially not the health of children. 

The science confirms harmful biological effects at levels that FCC and ICNIRP limits would consider “safe”.    In fact, the majority of studies on critical endpoints such as genetic and neurological damage show effects. 

Many Cities and Towns Have Laws To Restrict Cell Tower Antennas  Near Homes and Schools 

• Encinitas, CA – No antennas within 500 feet from residential dwelling unit, No antennas within 500 feet of daycare facility or school
• Shelburne, MA – no wireless antennas within 3,000 feet of schools and within 1,500 feet of homes and no new wireless antennas in residential zones.
• Copake, NY – no wireless facility may be within 1,500 feet from homes, schools, churches, or other buildings containing dwelling units.
• Sallisaw, OK –  no commercial wireless telecommunications towers within 1,500 of homes.
• Calabasas, CA – no “Tier 2” wireless telecommunications facilities within 1,000 feet of homes and schools.
• Bedford, NH –  No wireless antennas within 750 feet from nearest residentially-zoned property.
• Scarsdale, NY – No wireless facilities within 500 feet from homes, schools, parks, and houses of worship.
• Davis, CA – no freestanding wireless facilities within 500 feet of residential zone and schools.
• Westlake Village, CA – no facilities within 500 feet of homes.
• Randolph, MA – no wireless antennas within 500 feet of homes and businesses.
• Petaluma, CA – no “small cell” antennas within 500 feet of homes.
• Suisin City, CA – no “small cell” antennas within 500 feet of homes.
• Contra Costa County, CA – no new high-visibility facilities or towers within 300 feet of residential zones.
• North Hempstead NY– No installations within 350 feet of a school

Cell Tower have been stopped and removed from schools after strong community action.  

Many communities have halted school cell towers in the final hour. Some schools have even had cell towers removed or relocated after strong community opposition.

For example, in Ripon California the Sprint cell tower was moved without litigation as a precautionary measure after cases of cancer in children came to light. Read News Report

In Tarrytown, New York,  a cell tower place near a children’s playground and low income housing was also removed after news reports showcased the injustice. Read News Report

In Prince George’s County Maryland a cell tower building company made a deal for over 60 schools to be marketed as cell tower sites with a master leasing agreement sparking strong community opposition. After the community became engaged, and hard questions were asked, the school cell tower deal ended and the Prince George’s County School Board (PGCPS) did not renew the deal after the system CEO wrote a letter that  “Milestone Communications [now called Milestone Towers] has not met our desired standards of transparency.” (See also letters from School Board Member Lupi Grady, CEO Dr. Maxwell Milestone Communications Letter to Citizen on Answers to Questions About The Greenbelt Tower and Milestone Communications Letter to PGCPS CEO Withdrawing From Eleanor Roosevelt High School and Accokeek Academy)

One reason schools end cell tower deals is that they really are not making a lot of money as stated in a letter by PGCPS CEO Dr. Maxwell’s  Letter on how the money is small from the cell towers. When the cell towers are pitched to school, big numbers are thrown around (usually about how much money over ten years will be made), but in reality the monthly amount is small and the deal gives the cell tower a cheaper deal than a more commercial space. 

Environmental pollution from cell towers is a human rights issue for children.

Human rights experts argue that cell tower placement near schools is a human rights issue for children because “protection of children is a high threshold norm in Human Right  law” and “any widespread or systematic form of environmental pollution that poses a long-term threat to a child’s rights to life, development or health may constitute an international human rights violation.” 

5G can be easily added to cell towers once they are built. 

Cell towers have 2G, 3G, and 4G antennas. 5G antennas are being added to base stations worldwide. After a cell tower is erected, new antennas can be easily added and generally without any  (or minimal) public participation in the decision-making process. 5G antennas can be mounted on both shorter so-called “small cells” and larger “macro” towers.  

Cell tower radiation is classified as “High Risk” by insurance companies. 

Insurance companies do not insure for long-term damages from the electromagnetic radiation emitted by these towers. 5G, cell tower radiation, and electromagnetic fields are all repeatedly classified as “high risk” and compared to asbestos in insurance white papers. 

A review paper entitled “Limiting liability with positioning to minimize negative health effects of T cellular phone towers” reviewed the “large and growing body of evidence that human exposure to RFR from cellular phone base stations causes negative health effects” and recommends restricting antennas within 500 m of schools and hospitals to protect companies from future liability.

Property values go down when you can see the cell tower. 

School cell towers are usually in neighborhoods. Cell towers near homes are eyesores and can devalue properties, lower the selling price, and in turn, can impact the tax base of the area. 

EHT has compiled data on property decreases from cell towers here. 

Cell towers can catch fire and they contain hazardous material. 

Cell towers can catch fire and create serious safety issues due to the equipment and inadequate worker safety procedures in place. Cell tower compounds contain hazardous equipment such as diesel fuel and lead-acid batteries. There have been accidents where these tanks leak, polluting the area. 

Firefighter unions have long opposed cell towers on their stations.

• The International Association of Firefighters has officially opposed cell towers on its stations since 2004 after a study found neurological damage in firefighters with antennas on their fire stations.
• In 2017 when 5G “small cells” were coming to California, firefighter organizations came out in strong opposition to bill SB649, and it was amended to exempt their stations from the small cell deployment. The unions successfully lobbied to get their fire stations carved out of state laws that would have forced cell towers onto fire stations.
• Over the years, many local firefighter unions have testified, written letters, and created websites stating cell antennas should not be placed on stations until scientific research shows safety.
• News Story: ConsumerWatch: 5G Cellphone Towers Signal Renewed Concerns Over Impacts on Health
• Learn more about firefighters at EHT’s webpage on firefighters. 

Decisionmakers are aware that government cell tower radiation limits do not protect children from biological effects.

The Los Angeles Unified School District has banned cell towers on their school campuses and also has set an allowable limit that is 10,000 times lower than the FCC’s limit. LAUSD recognizes there are non-thermal effects and that children are more vulnerable.

In India, the government reset its limits to 1/10th of ICNIRP after an inter-Ministerial report documented impacts to birds and bees. The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, and regions of Zilla Parishad, Rajasthan, and Mumbai have all banned cell antenna/tower installations on schools.

Several countries have stricter allowable cell tower radiation limits for what are termed “sensitive” areas. Cell antennas are always placed at a distance from these sensitive areas to comply with this policy.

Chile’s “Antenna Law” prohibits cell antennas/towers in what they define as “sensitive areas,” meaning schools, nurseries, hospitals, and nursing homes.

(Note: LAUSD policy is a step in the right direction but it still is inadequate and the current implementation of technology in the buildings is non-protective.)

Research studies find that a cell tower near a school will increase student and staff exposure. 

When cell antennas are located near a school, the environmental levels of RF usually will increase. This is common sense and a matter of math and physics. The RF increases inside the school will generally be highest in classrooms where the windows are in line of sight with antennas. 

• A 2017 study looked at RFR levels to which kindergarten children were exposed, depending on how close their school was to base stations/cell towers. Children carried RFR measuring devices. Researchers found that children in kindergartens located near to cell antennas had total radiofrequency exposures more than 3 times higher than children at schools where cell antennas were further away. 

• A 2018 study measured radiofrequency radiation exposures in the environment, including emissions from cell phone towers, TV and FM radio broadcast antennas, cell phone handsets, and Wi-Fi—in several countries including the United States. The researchers concluded that cell phone tower (base station) radiation emissions are the dominant contributor to RFR exposure in most outdoor areas.