Showing posts with label cell phone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cell phone. Show all posts
Thursday, March 30, 2017
Wall Street Journal Announces Cell Phone Cancer Link
U.S. Studies using rats, costing $25 million dollars, leaves no room for debate. The most comprehensive study that has ever been conducted. Exposed for 10 minutes on and 10 minutes off intervals for 9 hours per day to mimic what humans are exposed to daily. Tumors in the brain and around the heart were definitely linked to the exposure.
Expert in clip states:
"You can't say these are perfectly safe."
"This calls into question the previous standards that were based on thermal effects only."
Thursday, July 21, 2016
U.S. True "Causitive" Study Links RF and Cancer
GTCO-ATL followers: Ever wonder if you supported the right side in the debate over whether DeKalb County should take money to place cell phone towers next to young children on their own public school campuses, in the middle of their neighborhoods? Well, if so, you can rest assured that you did the right thing by speaking up for the children in our county and now science is on your side, too. The more research being done on this subject, the more science is siding with you. And this time, the study was conducted to the top level of controls, with plenty of funds to cover the expenses and it was done in the U.S. Here is how things worked out....
Major Cell Phone Radiation Study Reignites Cancer Questions
Exposure to radio-frequency radiation linked to tumor formation in rats
Federal scientists released partial findings Friday from a $25-million animal study that tested the possibility of links between cancer and chronic exposure to the type of radiation emitted from cell phones and wireless devices. The findings, which chronicle an unprecedented number of rodents subjected to a lifetime of electromagnetic radiation starting in utero, present some of the strongest evidence to date that such exposure is associated with the formation of rare cancers in at least two cell types in the brains and hearts of rats. The results, which were posted on a prepublication Web site run by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, are poised to reignite controversy about how such everyday exposure might affect human health.
Researchers at the National Toxicology Program (NTP), a federal interagency group under the National Institutes of Health, led the study. They chronically exposed rodents to carefully calibrated radio-frequency (RF) radiation levels designed to roughly emulate what humans with heavy cell phone use or exposure could theoretically experience in their daily lives. The animals were placed in specially built chambers that dosed their whole bodies with varying amounts and types of this radiation for approximately nine hours per day throughout their two-year life spans. “This is by far—far and away—the most carefully done cell phone bioassay, a biological assessment. This is a classic study that is done for trying to understand cancers in humans,” says Christopher Portier, a retired head of the NTP who helped launch the study and still sometimes works for the federal government as a consultant scientist. “There will have to be a lot of work after this to assess if it causes problems in humans, but the fact that you can do it in rats will be a big issue. It actually has me concerned, and I’m an expert.”
More than 90 percent of American adults use cell phones. Relatively little is known about their safety, however, because current exposure guidelines are based largely on knowledge about acute injury from thermal effects, not long-term, low-level exposure. The International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2011 classified RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen. But data from human studies has been “inconsistent,” the NTP has said on its website. Such studies are also hampered by the realities of testing in humans, such as recall bias—meaning cancer patients have to try to remember their cell phone use from years before, and how they held their handsets. Those data gaps prompted the NTP to engage in planning these new animal studies back in 2009.
The researchers found that as the thousands of rats in the new study were exposed to greater intensities of RF radiation, more of them developed rare forms of brain and heart cancer that could not be easily explained away, exhibiting a direct dose–response relationship. Overall, the incidence of these rare tumors was still relatively low, which would be expected with rare tumors in general, but the incidence grew with greater levels of exposure to the radiation. Some of the rats had glioma—a tumor of the glial cells in the brain—or schwannoma of the heart. Furthering concern about the findings: In prior epidemiological studies of humans and cell phone exposure, both types of tumors have also cropped up as associations.
In contrast, none of the control rats—those not exposed to the radiation—developed such tumors. But complicating matters was the fact that the findings were mixed across sexes: More such lesions were found in male rats than in female rats. The tumors in the male rats “are considered likely the result of whole-body exposure” to this radiation, the study authors wrote. And the data suggests the relationship was strongest between the RF exposure and the lesions in the heart, rather than the brain: Cardiac schwannomas were observed in male rats at all exposed groups, the authors note. But no “biologically significant effects were observed in the brain or heart of female rats regardless of modulation.” Based on these findings, Portier said that this is not just an associated finding—but that the relationship between radiation exposure and cancer is clear. “I would call it a causative study, absolutely. They controlled everything in the study. It’s [the cancer] because of the exposure.”
Researchers at the National Toxicology Program (NTP), a federal interagency group under the National Institutes of Health, led the study. They chronically exposed rodents to carefully calibrated radio-frequency (RF) radiation levels designed to roughly emulate what humans with heavy cell phone use or exposure could theoretically experience in their daily lives. The animals were placed in specially built chambers that dosed their whole bodies with varying amounts and types of this radiation for approximately nine hours per day throughout their two-year life spans. “This is by far—far and away—the most carefully done cell phone bioassay, a biological assessment. This is a classic study that is done for trying to understand cancers in humans,” says Christopher Portier, a retired head of the NTP who helped launch the study and still sometimes works for the federal government as a consultant scientist. “There will have to be a lot of work after this to assess if it causes problems in humans, but the fact that you can do it in rats will be a big issue. It actually has me concerned, and I’m an expert.”
More than 90 percent of American adults use cell phones. Relatively little is known about their safety, however, because current exposure guidelines are based largely on knowledge about acute injury from thermal effects, not long-term, low-level exposure. The International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2011 classified RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen. But data from human studies has been “inconsistent,” the NTP has said on its website. Such studies are also hampered by the realities of testing in humans, such as recall bias—meaning cancer patients have to try to remember their cell phone use from years before, and how they held their handsets. Those data gaps prompted the NTP to engage in planning these new animal studies back in 2009.
The researchers found that as the thousands of rats in the new study were exposed to greater intensities of RF radiation, more of them developed rare forms of brain and heart cancer that could not be easily explained away, exhibiting a direct dose–response relationship. Overall, the incidence of these rare tumors was still relatively low, which would be expected with rare tumors in general, but the incidence grew with greater levels of exposure to the radiation. Some of the rats had glioma—a tumor of the glial cells in the brain—or schwannoma of the heart. Furthering concern about the findings: In prior epidemiological studies of humans and cell phone exposure, both types of tumors have also cropped up as associations.
In contrast, none of the control rats—those not exposed to the radiation—developed such tumors. But complicating matters was the fact that the findings were mixed across sexes: More such lesions were found in male rats than in female rats. The tumors in the male rats “are considered likely the result of whole-body exposure” to this radiation, the study authors wrote. And the data suggests the relationship was strongest between the RF exposure and the lesions in the heart, rather than the brain: Cardiac schwannomas were observed in male rats at all exposed groups, the authors note. But no “biologically significant effects were observed in the brain or heart of female rats regardless of modulation.” Based on these findings, Portier said that this is not just an associated finding—but that the relationship between radiation exposure and cancer is clear. “I would call it a causative study, absolutely. They controlled everything in the study. It’s [the cancer] because of the exposure.”
Read the full article here.
Thursday, June 2, 2016
TURNING POINT: U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) Links Cellphone Radiation and Cancer
|
|
Media Coverage and Analysis of Recent Cellphone
Study Released on Friday, May 27, 2016
As the Center for Safer
Wireless announced on Friday morning, May 27, the U.S. National Toxicology
Program (NTP) was expected to report to the public on its $25 million completed
study which showed statistically significant increases in cancer among rats that
had been exposed to GSM or CDMA signals for two-years. Thankfully, because of Microwave News' excellent reporting,
portions of the study's findings were announced sooner than were originally
expected. To the wireless industries benefit, it came right before the Memorial
Day weekend when people were focused on the holiday.
Despite the quick
turnaround, the wireless industry had time to strategize and notify the media
with their points and position. As usual, the strategy is to create doubt,
question the study and call for more research. The wireless industry uses the
same playbook as the tobacco industry implemented years ago because it works.
It's quite evident in the following headlines and reporting.
Better coverage and headlines are at:
"There are arguments in the
literature now that we are at the beginning of an epidemic of
cancers," Chris Portier, former associate director of the NTP,
told Mother Jones.
Ron Melnick, a former National Toxicology Program
researcher who worked on early stages of the study before his retirement, told
the Wall Street Journal: 'Where people were saying there's no
risk, I
think this ends that kind of statement.'
Louis Slesin of
Microwave News believes that the cell phone controversy will never be the
same again because the study contradicts conventional wisdom that such
health effects are impossible.
David Carpenter is
director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of
Albany and on the Medical Advisory Board of the Center for Safer Wireless. "This
is a game changer, there is no question," he said. "It confirms what we have
been seeing for many years - though now we have evidence in animals as well
as in humans." Carpenter went on to add, "The NTP has the credibility of the
federal government. It will be very difficult for the naysayers to deny the
association any longer."
"Such positive results ... suggest that human health
might be in some danger," Dariusz Leszczynski, a Finnish researcher who
focuses on radiation and health said in an email. "The human health risk might
not only be possible but it might rather be probable."
Joel Moscowitz, Ph.D., Director, Center for Family
and Community Health at University of California, Berkeley offered research to
indicate health effects from cell phones in the op/ed section of the Wall Street
journal on Sunday, May 23. According to Dr. Moscowitz "The NTP report did not
assess the overall risk of tumors for both types of tumors studied. By my
calculation, thirty of 540 (5.5%), or one in 18 male rats exposed to cell phone
radiation developed cancer. In addition, 16 pre-cancerous hyperplasias were
diagnosed. Thus, 46 of 540, or one in 12 male rats exposed to cell phone
radiation developed cancer or a pre-cancerous lesion........ Though not
statistically significant one in 33 female rats exposed to cell phone
radiation developed cancer or a pre-cancerous lesion. No cancers were found
in 90 male and 90 female rats in the unexposed control group."
The
Center for Safer Wireless believes the NTP study offers more credible evidence
that products emitting pulsed radiofrequency radiation can cause health effects.
We think everyone should take precautions when using wireless devices such as
cellphones, iPads, tablets, laptops, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc.
Regards,
Desiree
Jaworski
Executive
Director
|
Wednesday, May 27, 2015
11 Alive News Exposes Georgia's Ties to ALEC and Cell Phone Lobbyists
An Atlanta TV station just aired one of the best takedowns of the secretive nature of ALEC we've ever seen:
Posted by Media Matters for America on Friday, May 22, 2015
Monday, April 7, 2014
Monday, September 16, 2013
American Academy of Pediatrics Demands FCC Protect Children from Cell Phone & Wireless Radiation
Letter from the American Academy of Pediatrics to the
FCC Regarding Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation Standards
The American Academy of Pediatrics submitted the following letter to the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).
Communications Commission (FCC).
The letter urges the FCC to adopt radiation standards that:
1.) protect children's health and well-being from radiation emitted by cell phones and other
wireless devices; 2.) reflect how people actually use their cell phones; and
3.) provide sufficient information to enable consumers to make informed purchasing decisions.
The letter is also available on the FCC's web site at http://bit.ly/17tQclg.
August 29, 2013
The Honorable Mignon L. Clyburn
Acting Commissioner
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC 20054
The Honorable Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg
Commissioner
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993
Dear Acting Chairwoman Clyburn and Commissioner Hamburg:
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), a non-profit professional organization of
60,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical subspecialists, and pediatric surgical
specialists dedicated to the health, safety and well-being of infants, children, adolescents,
and young adults appreciates this opportunity to comment on the Proposed Rule
“Reassessment of Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Limits and Policies”
published in the Federal Register on June 4, 2013.
In the past few years, a number of American and international health and scientific bodies
have contributed to the debate over cell phone radiation and its possible link to cancer. The
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the United Nations’
World Health Organization, said in June 2011 that a family of frequencies that includes
mobile-phone emissions is “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” The National Cancer
Institute has stated that although studies have not demonstrated that RF energy from
cell phones definitively causes cancer, more research is needed because cell phone technology
and cell phone use are changing rapidly. These studies and others clearly demonstrate the
need for further research into this area and highlight the importance of reassessing current
policy to determine if it is adequately protective of human health.
60,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical subspecialists, and pediatric surgical
specialists dedicated to the health, safety and well-being of infants, children, adolescents,
and young adults appreciates this opportunity to comment on the Proposed Rule
“Reassessment of Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Limits and Policies”
published in the Federal Register on June 4, 2013.
In the past few years, a number of American and international health and scientific bodies
have contributed to the debate over cell phone radiation and its possible link to cancer. The
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the United Nations’
World Health Organization, said in June 2011 that a family of frequencies that includes
mobile-phone emissions is “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” The National Cancer
Institute has stated that although studies have not demonstrated that RF energy from
cell phones definitively causes cancer, more research is needed because cell phone technology
and cell phone use are changing rapidly. These studies and others clearly demonstrate the
need for further research into this area and highlight the importance of reassessing current
policy to determine if it is adequately protective of human health.
As radiation standards are reassessed, the AAP urges the FCC to adopt radiation standards
that:
Protect children’s health and well-being. Children are not little adults and are
disproportionately impacted by all environmental exposures, including cell phone radiation.
Current FCC standards do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific
to pregnant women and children. It is essential that any new standard for cell phones or other
wireless devices be based on protecting the youngest and most vulnerable populations to
ensure they are safeguarded throughout their lifetimes.
Reflect current use patterns. The FCC has not assessed the standard for cell phone
radiation since 1996. Approximately 44 million people had mobile phones when the standard
was set; today, there are more than 300 million mobile phones in use in the United States.
While the prevalence of wireless phones and other devices has skyrocketed, the behaviors
around cell phone uses have changed as well. The number of mobile phone calls per day, the
length of each call, and the amount of time people use mobile phones has increased, while cell
phone and wireless technology has undergone substantial changes. Many children, adolescents
and young adults, now use cell phones as their only phone line and they begin using wireless
phones at much younger ages. Pregnant women may carry their phones for many hours per
day in a pocket that keeps the phone close to their uterus. Children born today will experience
a longer period of exposure to radio-frequency fields from cellular phone use than will adults,
because they start using cellular phones at earlier ages and will have longer lifetime exposures.
FCC regulations should reflect how people are using their phones today.
phones at much younger ages. Pregnant women may carry their phones for many hours per
day in a pocket that keeps the phone close to their uterus. Children born today will experience
a longer period of exposure to radio-frequency fields from cellular phone use than will adults,
because they start using cellular phones at earlier ages and will have longer lifetime exposures.
FCC regulations should reflect how people are using their phones today.
Provide meaningful consumer disclosure. The FCC has noted that it does not provide
consumers with sufficient information about the RF exposure profile of individual phones to
allow consumers to make informed purchasing decisions. The current metric of RF exposure
available to consumers, the Specific Absorption Rate, is not an accurate predictor of actual
exposure. AAP is supportive of FCC developing standards that provide consumers with the
information they need to make informed choices in selecting mobile phone purchases, and to
help parents to better understand any potential risks for their children. To that end, we
support the use of metrics that are specific to the exposure children will experience.
The AAP supports the reassessment of radiation standards for cell phones and other wireless
products and the adoption of standards that are protective of children and reflect current
use patterns. If you have questions, please contact Clara Filice in the AAP’s Washington
Office at 202/347-8600.
products and the adoption of standards that are protective of children and reflect current
use patterns. If you have questions, please contact Clara Filice in the AAP’s Washington
Office at 202/347-8600.
Sincerely,
Thomas K. McInerny, MD FAAP
President
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Smoke Rise Residents Reach Out to DeKalb's New Interim CEO on Cell Tower Issue
8/17/13: Note to Our Readers: Dr. Johanna Stamper is a research scientist in mathematical biology. She has been trained in cancer research and is very concerned that there would be any possibility of cell towers being placed at schools, especially elementary schools, in our county. She says that once she explains the science, the concerns of the people in her neighborhood became much more elevated.
If you share the concerns of Dr. Stamper and Get the Cell Out, please take a few moments to email or call, at a minimum, the following people who are critical to this struggle:
8/13/13
Dear Smoke Signal Editors,
Thank you for printing the Letter to the Editor in your August 2013 newspaper edition. It was from a new Smoke Rise family that recently learned about the former school board's vote to approve cell towers for several schools in DeKalb County, including one at Smoke Rise Elementary School. We applaud your publication for helping to educate and inform your community on this issue.
Thank you to Robert Stamper and Dr. Johanna Stamper for stepping up to inform your new community of Smoke Rise about what you learned about the dangers of cell towers and encouraging them to contact their elected officials! We have reprinted a letter to the editor written by Dr. Stamper which was published in the August 2013 edition of the Smoke Signal, a local newsletter for the residents in the Smoke Rise community.
We also thank the Smoke Rise Homeowners' Association for sending Virginia Reece as their representative to the Tucker Parent Council meeting at Brockett Elementary School at the end of the last school year. We appreciate her comments and efforts to educate the Smoke Rise community and others in DeKalb who heard her dialogue with the Interim Superintendent Thurmond.
We have listed some contact details here in order to assist your efforts. As Dr. Stamper noted, it is very important for the residents near any of the proposed school cell tower sites to voice their concerns to Commissioner Lee May as he is now the acting CEO of our county.
The county commissioners have all stated they would uphold the codes at the time, but those codes are now in a review process. Don't let the cell tower companies slip changes past you that could lead to a tower being built without community input.
We hope you will visit our website, www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org, to keep up to date on this issue. We want to remind your readers that when they email or speak to their local government officials, it is important to mention concern for ALL the schools in DeKalb County and ALL the children. The safety of the children must come as the highest priority above anything else. Our leaders need to know that this is one issue that cannot be used to pit communities against one another. On this topic, we will not be divided.
Thanks Smoke Rise residents for being GOOD NEIGHBORS!
--- Get the Cell Out Atlanta
Please leave respectful comments below:
If you share the concerns of Dr. Stamper and Get the Cell Out, please take a few moments to email or call, at a minimum, the following people who are critical to this struggle:
- Director of Public Works, DeKalb County:
- Director of Planning and Sustainability, DeKalb County:
- Interim CEO of DeKalb County:
- Interim Superintendent of DeKalb County Schools:
- And your county commissioner, school board representatives and state legislators.
8/13/13
Dear Smoke Signal Editors,
Thank you for printing the Letter to the Editor in your August 2013 newspaper edition. It was from a new Smoke Rise family that recently learned about the former school board's vote to approve cell towers for several schools in DeKalb County, including one at Smoke Rise Elementary School. We applaud your publication for helping to educate and inform your community on this issue.
Thank you to Robert Stamper and Dr. Johanna Stamper for stepping up to inform your new community of Smoke Rise about what you learned about the dangers of cell towers and encouraging them to contact their elected officials! We have reprinted a letter to the editor written by Dr. Stamper which was published in the August 2013 edition of the Smoke Signal, a local newsletter for the residents in the Smoke Rise community.
We also thank the Smoke Rise Homeowners' Association for sending Virginia Reece as their representative to the Tucker Parent Council meeting at Brockett Elementary School at the end of the last school year. We appreciate her comments and efforts to educate the Smoke Rise community and others in DeKalb who heard her dialogue with the Interim Superintendent Thurmond.
We have listed some contact details here in order to assist your efforts. As Dr. Stamper noted, it is very important for the residents near any of the proposed school cell tower sites to voice their concerns to Commissioner Lee May as he is now the acting CEO of our county.
The county commissioners have all stated they would uphold the codes at the time, but those codes are now in a review process. Don't let the cell tower companies slip changes past you that could lead to a tower being built without community input.
We hope you will visit our website, www.GETtheCELLoutATL.org, to keep up to date on this issue. We want to remind your readers that when they email or speak to their local government officials, it is important to mention concern for ALL the schools in DeKalb County and ALL the children. The safety of the children must come as the highest priority above anything else. Our leaders need to know that this is one issue that cannot be used to pit communities against one another. On this topic, we will not be divided.
Thanks Smoke Rise residents for being GOOD NEIGHBORS!
--- Get the Cell Out Atlanta
Please leave respectful comments below:
Friday, July 5, 2013
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Theft of Smartphones Dubbed a "National Epidemic"
Parents, please read and carefully consider if this information affects how you feel about a proposed transition to e-books in our school system (currently "on hold" as it was a decision made by the former Superintendent in 2012).
Children are smaller, weaker and more vulnerable than the adults who are being robbed of their cell phones every day! And many children have predictable schedules where they must walk home from school or the bus stop daily. Why set them up to be the next targets for a crime that is currently out of control?
U.S. officials to meet over cellphone thefts
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Top law enforcement officials from San Francisco and New York plan to meet with some of the largest U.S. smartphone makers next week to help thwart the rise in cellphone thefts and robberies.
San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced Wednesday that their meeting scheduled to take place in New York City on June 13 will be dubbed a "Smartphone Summit."
Gascon and Schneiderman said they plan to meet with representatives from Apple Inc., Google Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Microsoft Corp. and urge them to create new technology to permanently and quickly disable stolen smartphones, making them worthless to thieves.
In San Francisco, where more than half all robberies involve a cellphone, Gascon has called on the companies to create new technology such as a "kill switch" to render phones useless. His office cites a 27-year old tourist who suffered severe knife wounds to his face and throat two weeks ago after being robbed by two men over his iPhone.
In New York, Schneiderman said there was a 40% spike in cellphone thefts last year. Authorities there have coined the thefts of the popular iPhone and other Apple-related products as "Apple-picking."
"With 1.6 million Americans falling victim to smartphone theft in 2012, this has become a national epidemic," Gascón said in a statement. "Unlike other types of crimes, smartphone theft can be eradicated with a simple technological solution."
Nearly 175 million cellphones — mostly smartphones — have been sold in the U.S. in the past year and account for $69 billion in sales, according to IDC, a Massachusetts-based research firm.
And now almost one 1 of 3 robberies nationwide involves the theft of a mobile phone, reports the Federal Communications Commission, which is coordinating formation this fall of a highly anticipated national database system to track cellphones reported stolen.
Schneiderman said a recent study found that lost and stolen cellphones cost consumers over $30 billion, last year.
"The theft of handheld devices is the fastest-growing street crime, and increasingly, incidents are turning violent," Schneiderman said in a statement. "It's time for manufacturers to be as innovative in solving this problem as they have been in designing devices that have reshaped how we live."
Late last month, Gascon — in a letter to the Major Cities Chiefs Association, a coalition of police chiefs from across the country — urged them to press for kill switches.
"Despite the growing threat to public safety, cell-phone manufacturers and carriers continue to look the other way," Gascón wrote. "It's time that corporations take social responsibility and do their part to end the victimization of hundreds of thousands of Americans."
In response, the police chiefs association followed suit and sent a letter on Monday to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. While commending the FCC and the CTIA wireless provider trade association on the national stolen phone database, they suggested that kill switch technology is "the only effective way" to go.
"By rendering phones completely useless, an FCC mandate for kill-switch technology will drastically reduce this major crime problem," Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, president of the chiefs' association wrote.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Don't Let 'Em Fool Ya
GTCO-ATL followers are reporting to us that 8 of 9 approved cell tower schools have received money recently for their cell phone towers even though the contracts expired last year. The only school that reported to have wanted a cell tower is the only one that appears to not be getting one (Lakeside High School). In addition, its feeder school and around the corner neighbor Briarlake does not appear to have an FCC license which is necessary for transmission and is the first step toward filing for a permit.
School communities affected by this recent news:
We will have more information to assist you in the next steps of this cell tower process in the days ahead. In the meantime, do not forget that the residents of DeKalb County have voted and the majority of them have said that they are behind you. They do not want these towers, no matter what anyone else says.
Here is a look at how that question was answered on the July ballot.
Should the DeKalb County School System Operate or Place Telecommunications Towers on the property of any elementary, middle, high or charter school? YES or NO?
* Results based on July 2012 voter referendum results.
2012 Polling Area YES NO
Allgood 33 67
Ashford Dunwoody Rd. 49 51
Ashford Park Ele. 48 52
Ashford Parkside 49 51
Austin 52 48
Austin Drive 30 70
Avondale 48 52
Avondale High 42 58
Bethune Middle 26 74
Bouldercrest Rd. 33 67
Boulevard 39 61
Briar Vista Elem. 53 47
Briarcliff 40 60
Briarlake Elem. 39 61
Briarwood 45 55
Brockett 38 62
Brockett Elem. 39 61
Brookhaven 47 53
Browns Mill Elem. 23 77
Burgess Elem. 40 60
Canby Lane Elem. 24 76
Candler 36 64
Cand-Mur Candler Elem. 34 66
Cedar Grove Elem. 26 74
Cedar Grove Middle 27 73
Cedar Grove South 27 73
Chamblee 47 53
Chapel Hill Elem 29 71
Chesnut Elem 45 55
Clairemont East 45 55
Clairemont West 41 59
Clairmont Hills 41 59
Clarkston 33 67
Clifton Elem. 26 74
Coan Middle 43 57
Columbia Middle 28 72
Coralwood 48 52
Covington 47 53
Covington Hwy Library 27 73
Cross Keys High 49 51
Crossroads 27 73
Doraville North 48 52
Doraville South 38 62
Dresden Elem 50 50
Druid Hills High 48 52
Dunaire Elem 36 64
Dunwoody 55 45
Dunwoody Elem. 48 52
Dunwoody Library 53 47
East Lake Elem. 41 59
Embry Hills 51 49
Emory Road 39 61
Emory South 50 50
Epworth 40 60
Evansdale Elem. 46 54
Fairington Elem. 28 72
Fernbank Elem. 49 51
Flakes Mill Fire Station 27 73
Flat Rock Elem. 25 75
Flat Shoals 29 71
Flat Shoals Elem. 28 72
Flat Shoals Library 26 74
Flat Shoals Parkway 25 75
Freedom Middle 29 71
Georgetown Square 51 49
Glenhaven 31 69
Glennwood 48 52
Gresham Road 30 70
Hambrick Elem. 34 66
Harris-Marg Ed. 46 54
Harris-Narvie Elem. 29 71
Hawthorne Elem. 48 52
Henderson Mill Elem. 51 49
Hugh Howell 43 57
Huntley Hills Elem. 46 54
Idlewood Elem. 40 60
Indian Creek Elem. 36 64
Johnson Estates 47 53
Jolly Elem. 37 63
Kelley Chapel Road 26 74
Kelley Lake Elem. 29 71
King-ML King Jr. High 28 72
Kingsley Elem 53 47
Kittredge 51 49
Knollwood Elem 35 65
Lakeside High 51 49
Lavista 52 48
Lavista Road 49 51
Lin-Mary Lin Elem 49 51
Lithonia 25 75
Lithonia High 31 69
Livsey Elem. 45 55
Marbut 27 73
Marhut Elem 27 73
Mathis-Bob Mathis Elem 23 77
McLendon 42 58
McNair Academy 33 67
McWilliams 24 76
Meadowview Elem. 29 71
Memorial North 34 66
Memorial South 27 73
Methropolitan 39 61
Midvale Elem. 46 54
Midvale Road 46 54
Midway Elem. 38 62
Miller Grove High 28 72
Miller Grove Middle 28 72
Miller Grove Road 25 75
Miller-Eld. Elem. 28 72
Montclair Elem. 34 63
Montreal 41 59
Mr. Vernon East 57 43
North Decatur 44 56
North Hairston 34 66
North Peachtree 45 55
Northlake 31 69
Oak Grove Elem. 52 48
Oak View Elem 29 72
Oakcliff Elem. 49 51
Oakhurst 40 60
Panola 28 72
Panola Road 19 81
Panola Way Elem. 29 71
Peachcrest Elem. 29 71
Peachtree Middle 47 53
Pine Lake 46 54
Piney Grove 42 58
Pleasantdale Elem. 48 52
Ponce DeLeon 41 59
Princeton Elem. 31 69
Rainbow Elem. 29 71
Redan Elem. 31 69
Redan Middle 31 69
Redan Road 28 72
Redan-Trotti Library 27 73
Rehoboth 37 63
Renfroe Middle 42 58
Rock Chapel Elem. 28 72
Rock Chapel Road 26 74
Rockbridge Elem. 36 64
Rockbridge Road 29 71
Rowland Elem. 31 69
Rowland Road 33 67
Sagamore Hills Elem. 47 53
Salem Middle 26 74
Scott 36 64
Shadow Rock Elem 31 69
Shamrock 42 58
Shaw-Robert Shaw Elem. 39 61
Silver Lake 51 49
Skyland 43 57
Smoke Rise Elem 44 56
Snapfinger Road South 25 75
Snapfinget Road North 32 68
South Deshon 28 72
South Hairston 28 72
Stephenson High 30 70
Stephenson Middle 27 73
Stone Mill Elem. 32 68
Stone Mtn. Chapmion 31 69
Stone Mountain Elem. 39 61
Stone Mountain Library 31 69
Stone Mountain Middle 32 68
Stoneview Elem. 27 73
Terry Mill Elem. 32 68
Tilly Mill Road 52 48
Toney Elem. 29 71
Tucker 43 57
Tucker Library 39 61
Valley Brook 39 61
Wadsworth Elem. 30 70
Warren Tech. 51 49
Wesley Chapel Library 23 77
White Oak 29 71
Winnona Park Elem 38 62
Winters Chapel 55 45
Woodbridge Elem. 27 73
Woodrow Road 28 72
Woodward Elem. 49 51
Wynbrooke Elem 27 73
Young Road 31 69
School communities affected by this recent news:
- Jolly Elementary, Clarkston
- Smoke Rise Charter Elementary, Stone Mountain/Tucker
- MLK High School, Lithonia
- Princeton Elementary, Redan
- Narvie J. Harris Elementary, Decatur (South) (Panthersville Stadium)
- Margaret Harris Comprehensive School, Atlanta
- Flat Rock Elementary, Lithonia
School communities possibly affected by this recent news:
- Briarlake Elementary, Decatur (North)
- Lakeside High School, Atlanta
School communities previously on the list, but later removed:
- Brockett Elementary, Tucker
- Medlock Elementary, Decatur / Toco Hills
- Meadowview Elemetnary, Decatur (South)
We will have more information to assist you in the next steps of this cell tower process in the days ahead. In the meantime, do not forget that the residents of DeKalb County have voted and the majority of them have said that they are behind you. They do not want these towers, no matter what anyone else says.
Here is a look at how that question was answered on the July ballot.
Should the DeKalb County School System Operate or Place Telecommunications Towers on the property of any elementary, middle, high or charter school? YES or NO?
* Results based on July 2012 voter referendum results.
Overall total: 62% NO (More than 75,000 voters)
2012 Polling Area YES NO
Allgood 33 67
Ashford Dunwoody Rd. 49 51Ashford Park Ele. 48 52
Ashford Parkside 49 51
Austin 52 48
Austin Drive 30 70
Avondale 48 52
Avondale High 42 58
Bethune Middle 26 74
Bouldercrest Rd. 33 67
Boulevard 39 61
Briar Vista Elem. 53 47
Briarcliff 40 60
Briarlake Elem. 39 61
Briarwood 45 55
Brockett 38 62
Brockett Elem. 39 61
Brookhaven 47 53
Browns Mill Elem. 23 77
Burgess Elem. 40 60
Canby Lane Elem. 24 76
Candler 36 64
Cand-Mur Candler Elem. 34 66
Cedar Grove Elem. 26 74
Cedar Grove Middle 27 73
Cedar Grove South 27 73
Chamblee 47 53
Chapel Hill Elem 29 71
Chesnut Elem 45 55
Clairemont East 45 55
Clairemont West 41 59
Clairmont Hills 41 59
Clarkston 33 67
Clifton Elem. 26 74
Coan Middle 43 57
Columbia Middle 28 72
Coralwood 48 52
Covington 47 53
Covington Hwy Library 27 73
Cross Keys High 49 51
Crossroads 27 73
Doraville North 48 52
Doraville South 38 62
Dresden Elem 50 50
Druid Hills High 48 52
Dunaire Elem 36 64
Dunwoody 55 45
Dunwoody Elem. 48 52
Dunwoody Library 53 47
East Lake Elem. 41 59
Embry Hills 51 49
Emory Road 39 61
Emory South 50 50
Epworth 40 60
Evansdale Elem. 46 54
Fairington Elem. 28 72
Fernbank Elem. 49 51
Flakes Mill Fire Station 27 73
Flat Rock Elem. 25 75
Flat Shoals 29 71
Flat Shoals Elem. 28 72
Flat Shoals Library 26 74
Flat Shoals Parkway 25 75
Freedom Middle 29 71
Georgetown Square 51 49
Glenhaven 31 69
Glennwood 48 52
Gresham Road 30 70
Hambrick Elem. 34 66
Harris-Marg Ed. 46 54
Harris-Narvie Elem. 29 71
Hawthorne Elem. 48 52
Henderson Mill Elem. 51 49
Hugh Howell 43 57
Huntley Hills Elem. 46 54
Idlewood Elem. 40 60
Indian Creek Elem. 36 64
Johnson Estates 47 53
Jolly Elem. 37 63
Kelley Chapel Road 26 74
Kelley Lake Elem. 29 71
King-ML King Jr. High 28 72
Kingsley Elem 53 47
Kittredge 51 49
Knollwood Elem 35 65
Lakeside High 51 49
Lavista 52 48
Lavista Road 49 51
Lin-Mary Lin Elem 49 51
Lithonia 25 75
Lithonia High 31 69
Livsey Elem. 45 55
Marbut 27 73
Marhut Elem 27 73
Mathis-Bob Mathis Elem 23 77
McLendon 42 58
McNair Academy 33 67
McWilliams 24 76
Meadowview Elem. 29 71
Memorial North 34 66
Memorial South 27 73
Methropolitan 39 61
Midvale Elem. 46 54
Midvale Road 46 54
Midway Elem. 38 62
Miller Grove High 28 72
Miller Grove Middle 28 72
Miller Grove Road 25 75
Miller-Eld. Elem. 28 72
Montclair Elem. 34 63
Montreal 41 59
Mr. Vernon East 57 43
North Decatur 44 56
North Hairston 34 66
North Peachtree 45 55
Northlake 31 69
Oak Grove Elem. 52 48
Oak View Elem 29 72
Oakcliff Elem. 49 51
Oakhurst 40 60
Panola 28 72
Panola Road 19 81
Panola Way Elem. 29 71
Peachcrest Elem. 29 71
Peachtree Middle 47 53
Pine Lake 46 54
Piney Grove 42 58
Pleasantdale Elem. 48 52
Ponce DeLeon 41 59
Princeton Elem. 31 69
Rainbow Elem. 29 71
Redan Elem. 31 69
Redan Middle 31 69
Redan Road 28 72
Redan-Trotti Library 27 73
Rehoboth 37 63
Renfroe Middle 42 58
Rock Chapel Elem. 28 72
Rock Chapel Road 26 74
Rockbridge Elem. 36 64
Rockbridge Road 29 71
Rowland Elem. 31 69
Rowland Road 33 67
Sagamore Hills Elem. 47 53
Salem Middle 26 74
Scott 36 64
Shadow Rock Elem 31 69
Shamrock 42 58
Shaw-Robert Shaw Elem. 39 61
Silver Lake 51 49
Skyland 43 57
Smoke Rise Elem 44 56
Snapfinger Road South 25 75
Snapfinget Road North 32 68
South Deshon 28 72
South Hairston 28 72
Stephenson High 30 70
Stephenson Middle 27 73
Stone Mill Elem. 32 68
Stone Mtn. Chapmion 31 69
Stone Mountain Elem. 39 61
Stone Mountain Library 31 69
Stone Mountain Middle 32 68
Stoneview Elem. 27 73
Terry Mill Elem. 32 68
Tilly Mill Road 52 48
Toney Elem. 29 71
Tucker 43 57
Tucker Library 39 61
Valley Brook 39 61
Wadsworth Elem. 30 70
Warren Tech. 51 49
Wesley Chapel Library 23 77
White Oak 29 71
Winnona Park Elem 38 62
Winters Chapel 55 45
Woodbridge Elem. 27 73
Woodrow Road 28 72
Woodward Elem. 49 51
Wynbrooke Elem 27 73
Young Road 31 69
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)