Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD): a manipulative propaganda tactic (according to Wikipedia).
Virginia Hines, in her recent letter on the subject of Concord’s wireless bylaw, suggests that her view is supported by hard science, quoting “Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., director, Center for Family and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley” (which he is). Dr. Moskowitz is also a member of the “International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields,” an organization whose stated purpose is to “make recommendations, based on the best peer-reviewed scientific research publications, that include, and go beyond establishing numerical exposure guidelines.”
Dr. Moskowitz and his colleagues have done science in this field; in their publications, they admit that there are many possible confounders and sources of error they have not, and cannot, account for. In their advocacy, they are less forthcoming. This suggests that while accusing the WHO of being biased, Dr. Moskowitz (and Ms. Hines in turn) are not reporting their own bias, which seems dead set against the use of non-ionizing radiation in human affairs (typical “wireless” signals are microwaves — same as the kitchen appliance — which are “non-ionizing radiation.”)
If ‘numerical exposure guidelines’ are insufficient, what are we to use instead? They don’t say. Dr. Moskowitz and his colleagues (and Ms. Hines) seem to believe the safe amount of exposure is “none.”
I find that answer unacceptable. I feel that we who live here, and those who visit here, should be able to call 911 from anywhere in town, and reach emergency services without fail. I expect that we can call family or friends from anywhere in the town if we need to reach them. Presently this is not possible, because we can’t put any cell towers anywhere useful. I don’t think that’s good public policy.
Thomas Amoroso
Stone Root Lane