6 foreign experts enlisted to Penang EMF panel

24
420

Six scientists, public health officials and experts have been enlisted to an International Advisory Panel set up by the Penang Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Radiation Protection Alliance.

They are:

  • Dr Gerd Oberfeld, adviser for environmental medicine of the Austrian Medical Association
  • Olle Johansson, associate professor, head of the Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm
  • Dr David Carpenter, Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment, University at Albany, Rensselaer, NY, United States
  • Dr Carlos Sosa, physician and surgeon in Medellin, Columbia
  • Eileen O’Connor, Trustee of the Radiation Research Trust, UK
  • Alex Swinkels, National Platform on Radiation Risks, Netherlands and Board Member, International EMF Alliance

The Penang EMF Protection Alliance has also become the first group in Asia to join the International EMF Alliance.

The Penang group wants the state government to abide by the precautionary principle in the legalisation process of telco towers. Of the 849 telco structures on the island, 466 are without licences.

The telcos have been given yet another extension to comply with requirements. The first extension was given last year; the second last September (which expired in June 2010) and the latest extension until year -end, granted last month.

Why are they allowed to operate without licences? It kind of reminds me of the numerous swiftlet breeders all over George Town operating without licences.

READ MORE:  Rate hikes usher in Seberang Perai’s new 'city' status
Please help to support this blog if you can.

Read the commenting guidlelines for this blog.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
24 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Novel
Novel
16 Nov 2016 8.38am

Dear all.
I am a parent want to enroll my son to sjkc shang wu ayer itam , penang.
Many years ago I heard about the telco towers nearby 40 mtr.
I am concern and want to know if the tower has been moved or still there ?
Anybody know? Many thanks

B M Shah
B M Shah
26 Jan 2016 4.42pm

I have an important information to share.

ICNIRP compliance for BTS carried out through simulation in Malaysia are (allegedly) manipulated.

I have in depth details about the (alleged) Manipulations done, I did give this information to MCMC, MNA, and other telcos but to my surprise no one contact me back, instead they are talking to the vendors who have done this (alleged) manipulations.

frags
6 Aug 2010 3.13pm

I actually agree with Pearl. There are a lot of misinformation about this whole radiation thing. I wouldn’t expect an unbiased report from a group calling themselves ‘Radiation Protection Alliance’.

While were are at it, we should think about doing something about the radiation emanating from space.

Sean
Sean
6 Aug 2010 3.44pm
Reply to  frags

You might enjoy Wikipedia’s article on ‘electrosensitivity’ – the point of some of the groups in that Alliance. It’s a masterpiece of careful understatement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrosensitivity

frags
6 Aug 2010 4.23pm
Reply to  Sean

Yes I did. Thank you for the link.

Ken Wong
Ken Wong
6 Aug 2010 12.04am

It is good to obtain the opinion of experts. However, if the so called “foreign experts” come with a built-in bias against wifi, electronic equiptment, etc., are we going allow them to obstruct development? Singapore is well developed in this field and I would think that living in such a small island, the Singaporeans would have made a thorough study and taken the necessary precautions before installing their communications infrastructure. Perhaps we should learn from their experience, rather than trust these so called “foreign experts” who may have their own axe to grind.

tan, tanjong bungah
tan, tanjong bungah
5 Aug 2010 10.42am

Hi Pearl,

Thanks for the link, though your question should not be what Anil and his environmental friendly friends going to do about it, rather what all of us are going to do about it!!

If proven to be really harmful, then all of us are responsible to see that the plant is not set-up here. I’m confident Anil and his environment NGOs would spearhead the objections!

Pearl
Pearl
5 Aug 2010 8.32am

If the “environment” is such an important issue for you, Mr. Anil, please read the following news article: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100804PD206.html I will quote two little sections from that time-limited article (3 days only, after that you have to pay to read it) “Due to environment assessment issues brought forth by Taipei’s High Administrative Court, AU Optronics has been forced to terminate plans to construct a PV solar cell plant with an annual capacity of 2GWp in Changhua, Central Taiwan.” “AUO and Sunpower announced in May that they will jointly establish a high-efficiency solar cell plant in Malaysia.” The second quote is… Read more »

Sean
Sean
5 Aug 2010 1.13pm
Reply to  Pearl

Solar panel production is _exactly_ the same as any other kind of silicon-based electronics production, but with lower requirements for precision and purity. Unless you can come up with the substantial facts of why the factory was rejected on Environmental Impact grounds, I call ‘uninformative BS’ on your article. An EIA which rejected a proposal on the grounds that a building would take away a rare frog’s breeding ground would have said nothing about the ‘dirtiness’ of the activity taking place inside the building.

By all means call our attention to information you find online, but don’t make up nonsense.

Pearl
Pearl
6 Aug 2010 6.44am
Reply to  Sean

You go ask the Taiwanese court why the bar AUO from operating that plant in Taiwan, Sean.

Don’t ask me to produce the proofs.

It is the Taiwanese court which ruled that the AUO plant is too dirty for Taiwan so they forbid it from operation.

Sean
Sean
6 Aug 2010 2.12pm
Reply to  Pearl

You are an appalling troll! Your claim that the EIA’s rejection of the Taiwan plant on the grounds of toxic output is an invention of your own imagination. An EIA might reject your application to build a tele-sales (no known toxic waste besides verbal diarrhoea) office if it happened to be on the site of rare fauna or flora, or happened to block or disrupt a watercourse. Release of toxins is not the only reason why an EIA would reject a plan. If you want to promote your own fantasies at odds with what any rational, informed person would expect… Read more »

Pearl
Pearl
6 Aug 2010 7.52am
Reply to  Pearl

Read this: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100805PD218.html AUO is ramping up production of their PV modules on several plants all over the world, but notice one thing: Their Taichung, Taiwan plant is going to produce 200MWp by year’s end Their plant in the Czech Republic will rise to 100MWp. Their plant in Tianjin China will begin volume production in the fourth quarter and initial capacity should reach 200MWp. Last but not least, their plant in Malaysia (Penang) will provide 400MWp in capacity by the end of 2011. Why Malaysia? Is it because Malaysia is so good that they produce twice to 4 times their… Read more »

Sean
Sean
6 Aug 2010 2.17pm
Reply to  Pearl

If you’re considering being a ‘judge’ of Pearl’s false insinuation that a PV plant is unavoidably toxic, you might also consider the rational explanation that a plant built later in an expanding market might be larger, might be more efficient, might accommodate more recent technologies and processes. I’m not saying any of those things are the explanation for the apparent correlation in production rate with later builds, just wanted to give you a few more options in case you’re in the habit of just accepting whatever nonsense a person invents.

Pearl
Pearl
6 Aug 2010 6.52pm
Reply to  Sean

Mind carrying out some actual research before you spout off your hot air again, dear Sean?

Of the AUO plants I have listed out, the one in Malaysia isn’t the latest nor the most modernized, most efficient or whatever superlative adjective you want to tag on it.

aca
aca
4 Aug 2010 10.37pm

gerakan k,

ahmad ismail or some UMNO cronies…., ok with you?

Pearl
Pearl
4 Aug 2010 10.03pm

That so-called “Penang Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Radiation Protection Alliance” is nothing but a group of luddites.

If they are so afraid of “radiation” they can stop using the microwave oven, their own handphones and they should never go outside since the Sun Ray is “RADIATION” itself !

They are a front supported by UMNO.

Where were they back when Koh Tsu Koon was the Chief Minister?

Why they make so much noise now?

Who do they think they are to force the Penang state government to “abide” to some bogus standard?

Gerakan K
Gerakan K
4 Aug 2010 4.46pm

Why not employ local experts ??? Foreign first and Malaysian second ???

Yang
Yang
4 Aug 2010 7.08pm
Reply to  Gerakan K

What we want is COMPETENCY not incompetency

Pearl
Pearl
4 Aug 2010 11.26pm
Reply to  Yang

Dear machai,

You can’t differentiate between “competency” and “incompetency” in the first place.

Neither can those anti-radiation luddites.

Sean
Sean
4 Aug 2010 7.41pm
Reply to  Gerakan K

What part of ‘International’ did you struggle to understand?

Pearl
Pearl
4 Aug 2010 10.05pm
Reply to  Sean

“International”?

Heh !

I can also form an “international” grouping, in fact, anybody can.

Who cares for those “international expert”? …

Pearl
Pearl
4 Aug 2010 11.24pm
Reply to  Gerakan K

They do not.

Those “experts” came on their own, to sell their own brand of snake oil.

Fear mongering is the one thing those so called “International Experts” are good at.

Sewel
Sewel
4 Aug 2010 4.29pm

Aiyah dont main main with short wave radiation lah. The best is optical fiber cables lah. You will have super fast computers etc etc. Super fast Cable internet is still better then any wireless internet.

Penang is so small it will only take 1 or 2 years to lay the optical fibre cables. Easy lah and nobody getting whacked with shortwave radiation. Shortwave radiations stuffs up the melatonin levels in your body.