Say NO to the Telstra phone tower next to Balwyn Primary

Say NO to the Telstra phone tower next to Balwyn Primary

0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,500!

Dear Balwyn Primary School community and friends,
Did you know that Telstra are planning to upgrade higher frequency 4G technology and install new 5G technology on the mobile phone tower located opposite Balwyn Primary School (behind Selene’s Chocolate Café)?!
A mobile phone tower next to our school represents a continuous source of microwave radiation exposure for our children and teachers who spend most of their week at school. 
Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation (RF EMR) poses serious risks to our children's and teachers' health and well-being. We cannot see, hear or sense this wireless radiation, but exposure is continuous, inescapable and involuntary.

This technology has not been proven to be safe for long term use. We simply do not know the biological effects it may have on our children and wider community in the future. Do we want to risk the long term health of our children and teachers?

As parents and educators, we need to manage these risks to our children effectively by taking preventative, precautionary measures. We cannot afford to ignore the issue and hope that it does not unfold into a devastating situation in 10-20 years. 

We are responsible to our children and for what they will inherit from the actions (or inaction) of today.

Summary of Objections to Telstra:

  1. We object to the close proximity of the mobile phone tower located at 234 Whitehorse Rd, to Balwyn Primary School.  The industry Code requires mobile network companies to take account of community concern about locations of particular interest, such as places where children spend a lot of time. We request the location of the mobile phone tower be moved to a location that will not emit Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation to our school.
  2. In relation to the current community consultation, we object the proposed upgrade of 4G and 5G technologies at the mobile phone tower site, which will increase Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation exposure from 1.75 V/m to 13.38 V/m at a 0-50m distance from the site. Whilst the EME report states this is 4.85% of the public exposure limit, Australian standards are more than 100 to 10,000 times higher than some other countries around the world such as France, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Italy, China and Russia. It also only considers thermal heating effects and does not address biological harm. Above 0.5 V/m, nearly all electrosensitive individuals report experiencing adverse health effects.

If you share these concerns, the time to act is NOW as the proposals by Telstra are currently under consultation with the community. Please sign this petition now!

Say NO to the Telstra mobile phone tower next to Balwyn Primary!

Thank you!

Amanda Lui


Below is more detailed information about Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation, 5G and why the technology is not safe.

What is Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation (RF EMR)?
RF EMR is the transfer of energy by radio waves. RF EMR is produced by both natural and artificial sources. Artificial sources include radio and television broadcasting, mobile phones, networks such as Wi-Fi, cordless phones, point-to-point links and satellite communications.
Exposure to RF reduces very rapidly with distance so although we may be exposed to RF from various sources, such as mobile base stations and other wireless communication transmitters, it is close proximity to a particular source that will typically dominate the exposure. 
This is particularly concerning given the close proximity of the mobile phone tower in question to Balwyn Primary School.
In 2011, the International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) categorised wireless radiation as a ‘possible’ carcinogen (Group 2b); a cancer-causing substance. That is in the same category as DDT, tobacco smoke, diesel exhaust, welding fumes, formaldehyde and asbestos.
What is 5G?
5G is a new generation in mobile wireless communication that promises greater reliability, massive connectivity, faster network speeds, better coverage, low latency, mass cloud computing and autonomous systems incorporating artificial intelligence. This will dramatically change the way we live, work and travel as everything we own and buy from our cars to appliances will contain antennas and microchips that will be connected wirelessly as part of the ‘Internet of Things’ (IoT).
5G involves the mandatory irradiation of the public and life (plants and animals) on this planet without any research to verify its safety. There is currently no independently funded research being conducted by the telecommunications industry on the impact of 5G on human health (Blumenthal, 2018), despite the fact that radiofrequency fields used in current telecommunications and wireless technologies has demonstrated reproducible biological effects ranging from suppressing melatonin to increasing oxidative stress, DNA strand breaks and enhancing the permeability of the blood brain barrier (Bijlsma, 2018).
Whilst there has been little research conducted on the health effects arising from millimeter wave radiation (much higher radio frequencies), preliminary observations show that it increases skin temperature, alters gene expression, promotes oxidative stress, influences inflammatory processes and contributes to ocular damage (Di Ciaula, 2018). There are also concerns that the 2 to 5 million sweat ducts in the skin throughout the human body, act as a helical antenna to these frequencies and have been shown to absorb high levels of this radiation (Betzalel, Ben Ishai, & Feldman, 2018). This is a concern in light of the fact the skin is connected via the sympathetic nervous system to reflect states of stress, emotion, fear, pain and overall mental health.
As it will take years or even decades to establish the impact of exposing a generation to this electrosmog from the ‘cradle to the grave’, the precautionary principle should be invoked as a matter of urgency.
5G will result in a massive increase in inescapable, involuntary exposure to wireless radiation. We also don’t know enough about the effects on animals and plants, or the atmosphere.
Concerns about the upcoming launch of 5G radio telecommunications technology has prompted a mass petition against the move on safety grounds by thousands of scientists and related professionals. You can read more about this here:
NO ONE is Offering Safety Assurances
The EPA states "More research is needed to clarify the question of safety." 
We know of no medical organization stating that this radiation is safe.  Instead, they all state more research is needed.
Dr Samet of the World Health Organization states that the IARC classification means that "safety cannot be assured- a particular concern, given the prospect that most of the world’s population will have lifelong exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.”
Several World Health Organization scientists have now stated that the evidence has increased and that the proper classification for this radiation is in a higher risk catagory.  Dr. Anthony Miller has testified to the City of Toronto that wireless exposure should be a 2A (probable) carcinogen.
The disclaimer page on the ARPANSA website ( clearly states “ARPANSA cannot guarantee, and assumes no legal liability or responsibility for, the relevance, accuracy, currency or completeness of the information.” And yet the Australian Telecommunications industry heavily relies on the ARPANSA standards to justify the levels of public exposure to their wireless technologies.
So who will be responsible for the safety and well-being of the public? Certainly not Lloyds of London, one of the world’s premier insurance groups, who are refusing to insure health claims made against 5G wireless technologies. How curious that Lloyds of London has excluded from their policies any negative health effects caused by EMF injuries. Now, WHY would Lloyds leave all that money on the table if these technologies are so safe? And, why are other insurance companies following Lloyds’ lead?
The ‘Ionizing vs Non-Ionizing’ Argument

This is a common rebuttal to radiofrequency concerns so it is important that we understand why this does not prove the technology to be safe.

Yes, it is true that non-ionizing radiation does not have enough energy to knock electrons off an atom – a known mechanism for cancer. What is not mentioned, is the plethora of peer-reviewed research showing how else harm can be done to a cell through a variety of different biological mechanisms:

  • Stimulates voltage gated calcium channels leading to oxidative stress, cell death and inflammation (Prof Martin Pall; Abu Khadra et al, 2014).
  • Reduces melatonin levels - one of our body’s strongest DNA protectors and anti-cancer hormones (Aynali et al, 2013; ECERI, 2015).
  • Damages DNA – free radical damage leading to gene mutations and DNA strand breaks (European REFLEX research program, 2004).
  • Increases the permeability of the blood brain barrier (Nittby et al, 2008; ECERI, 2015).

Furthermore, numerous recent scientific publications have shown that electromagnetic fields affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines”. More than 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrate harm to human health from RF radiation. Effects include:

  • Alteration of heart rhythm
  • Altered gene expression
  • Altered metabolism
  • Altered stem cell development
  • Cancers
  • Cardiovascular disease
  • Cognitive impairment
  • DNA damage
  • Impacts on general well-being
  • Increased free radicals
  • Learning and memory deficits
  • Impaired sperm function and quality
  • Miscarriage
  • Neurological damage
  • Obesity and diabetes
  • Oxidative stress.

Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is abundant evidence of harm to diverse plant and wildlife.

Australia’s Exposure Guidelines Are Inadequate

ARPANSA’s exposure guidelines are not health based guidelines, they are industry based guidelines and were set taking into consideration only thermal effects of electromagnetic radiation. This was set by using a dummy with head dimensions based on a significantly sized U.S. Military man and the heating that occurred to that dummy after exposure of EMR similar to a cell phone for the duration of just 6 minutes use. This is not representative of a large sector of the community, most specifically children whose skulls will be considerably smaller than this so called ‘Sam’ the military man, nor is this time duration representative of the length of time many people use their phones both socially and for business. 

ARPANSA does not consider non-thermal effects, for which there is a growing body of evidence indicating adverse biological effects by a large number scientists and medical practitioners over and above the World Health Organisation who incidentally classified radiofrequency radiation (RF) as a 2B – possibly carcinogenic in 2011.
Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory ( are compiling a database of all of the research showing an effect, with currently over 3,000 peer reviewed scientific journal articles catalogued and able to be accessed by the general public. 

Taking the knowledge of this clear evidence of biological effects we can only extrapolate out to assume what effect 5G will have because 5G has not been studied and there are no plans by industries or governments mandating this roll out, to do any research.
We don’t know that it is safe, and like tobacco, asbestos and lead – our loved ones and all of humanity are going to be the research!! 

Please do not delay, sign the petition now!

Thank you!