What are the health hazards that can be caused by telecommunication masts to people living within close range?

Answer 1

The electromagnetic radiation (EM) from a cell phone hub is considerable, but it poses little threat to individuals on the ground around the antenna array. Even if they live close by. This kind of EM radiation does affect tissue, but it is not ionizing radiation. Some extremely minor energy absorption will take place; the tissue will take some damage when the radiation disrupts chemical processes, but it would be something that an individual would not generally notice.

There is a much more significant threat posed to individuals by this technology, and it is to the mobile phone user. Holding a cell phone up to one's head for long periods of time will cause more tissue damage to someone than living near a cell phone hub. Even though the phone's radiation is low power, it's right against the side of the head. And given the length of time some people spend on these devices, some causal connections to pathology will emerge if they haven't already been observed. You can't hold an RF (radio frequency) source, even a low-powered one, against the side of your head for an hour a day every day and expect no ill effects in time.

Answer 2

Research by the University of Essex in England determined that reported symptoms such as anxiety, tension and tiredness are not caused by the typical emissions from phone masts (cell phone towers) There was no difference in heart rate, blood pressure and skin conductance whether the mast was switched on or off.

In good science style the tests were double-blind. Neither the subjects or the monitors know if the towers were "on" or not. Subjects asked if the tower was on or off were right only as often as determined by probability.

In general folks who reported problems with emissions from the tower were more apt to have symptoms whether they were near a tower or not.

These results are consistent with other published studies (published in Environmental Health Perspectives by Regel et al, 2006).