Barrie Trower Autobiography

I trained at the Government's Microwave Warfare establishment in [the] 60’s. I worked with the underwater bomb disposal unit, which used microwaves. 

In the 70’s I helped debrief spies trained in
microwave warfare.


My first degree is in Physics. (I specialised in microwaves.)
My second degree is a research degree.
I have a teaching diploma in human physiology.
I teach advanced physics and mathematics at South Dartmoor College.

Author of the Tetra Report for the Police Federation. I predicted the illnesses, which the officers now complain of. These are illnesses that occurred before my report was published and cannot be psychosomatic.

At a conference in Birmingham I said “This Government, Industry and Government Scientists will be responsible for more deaths (of civilians) in peace time than all the terrorist organizations ever.” The evidence I have is showing this is correct. I put my money where my mouth is and stand my ground.

It is easy to prove TETRA is not safe.

I would like those who sign to say "it is” and should go ahead, to stand trial in future years for their decisions.

If microwave systems are safe, why is there a still on-going stealth warfare industry, going back 60 years, based on the fact that these waves (AT TETRA STRENGTH) are, and have been used to cause illnesses now occurring in residents / police officers?

At this point in time it is now into the germ warfare programme. If microwaves did not affect cells, this industry would not exist at all! No microwave communications system can be safe, especially TETRA. They are the same power as in the warfare industry and in Tetra’s case, the same pulse rate.

This Industry is a big money earner for everybody who gives permission to go ahead, yet they: the Government; Industry; Government Scientists; do not take any responsibility.

That falls on the Landowner and the user (Police Officer) who “volunteers” to use it as part of the 10 & 15 year cancer trial.

The option (given at the Police Conference – Birmingham) was to resign.

Tetra has a possible outlet of 32 Countries and 52 organisations within this Country, at present.

It must be stopped until there is a full judicial and public hearing into every aspect of this industry.

Not as in “Hansard” where the Minister in response to questions say’s “It is within Government guidelines”, which is based only on how warm you get: and even then it is wrong.

Somebody, somewhere, must stop what could be the biggest cause of illness around the World since the plague.

This must go public without fear/prejudice from those in a position of power.

The evidence is already to hand and proof can be obtained experimentally. In a few days. I will do it.

It is time that the intelligence of the general public was recognised and their wishes were respected, as opposed to Governmental pressure from an intimate relationship with Industrial Power/ Money, on planners.

Latest reports

11 children leaving a school (sick) in Sussex.
11 Leukemia and 3 motor neuron diseases around a tetra mast in East Fife.
90 illnesses in Dersley around a new Tetra mast. Sadly, in each case, neither the police nor Industry could attend the MP’s ‘call’ for a meeting.
Only I turned up! How much confidence does that instill in everybody?

Barrie Trower

Document 2.:

In Sir William Stewart’s report page 113, frequencies between 300 MHz and 300 GHz are defined as microwaves.


This is in line with the International Commission’s definition of microwaves as defined in 1998.

Therefore everything discussed in this report is in the microwave frequency.

Microwaves react very differently in our water-based bodies to radio waves.

The term ‘Radio Frequency’ is often used to describe microwaves based communication systems.

It is important that the term ‘Radio Frequency’ is not associated with Radio Waves, but associated with microwaves.

Microwaves are used by the communications industry because they are more penetrative than radio waves.

The Stewart Report 2004 asks that anecdotal evidence be taken seriously in the absence of long-term epidemiological studies, concerning illnesses around the area of mobile phone transmitters. Such anecdotal evidence produced July 2002 refers to 92 cases of cancer around just 19 mobile phone transmitters.

Other illnesses on the same paper refer to breast cancers, thyroid, bowel and blood problems.

Another report dated November 2003 titled ‘School References (school and cell tower antennas)’ from 138 schools lists miscarriages, brain tumours, cancers, breast cancers and teachers ill within this report. One single school had transmitters on its roof in the Saint-Cyr-l’Ecole quarter of France where 8 cases of cancer were confirmed among children in the district.

Common sense dictates that if you surround the school with mobile transmitters, the children will be able to use their mobile phones in school, this obviously exacerbates the problem of surrounding the children with microwave radiation.

The Stewart Report on page 63, section 4.1.1 recommends …..RF fields to which the public will be exposed will be kept to the lowest practical level that will be commensurate with the system….

The same page the Stewart Group recommend….. Base Stations sited within school grounds that the beam of greatest intensity should not fall on any part of the school grounds or buildings without agreement from the school and parents. Similar considerations should apply to macro base stations sited near school grounds.

Doctor Gerd Oberfield of the Environmental and Resource Studies Programme, Trent University, Ontario, Canada, published a report dated November and December 2004, titled ‘Putting Cellphone Antennas near schools is too Risky’.

This report states:…..with respect to negative health effects on people living in close proximity to cell phone towers, there are three different epidemiological studies including our recent study. All of them found statistically significant relationships between exposure to radiation and health effects.

Two of the studies did measurements in subjects’ bedrooms and found significant increases in stress related symptoms as well and neurological symptoms…. Also depression, fatigue, sleep disorders and concentration difficulty were found. These symptoms were related to exposure levels, not distance from the antennas. A recent research project called EU-Reflex or European Union Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure using sensitive in Vitro Methods shows that cells exposed to cell phone radiation exhibit chromosomal damage well below the exposure guidelines of the W.H.O.

It is worth mentioning that the ICNIRP Guidelines also the NRPB Guidelines are based purely on the thermal effect of the waves.

No account what so ever is given to the effect of the electric and magnetic of the wave interacting with the physiology of the body.

The WHO’s Guidelines are based on the short-term effects of this radiation. No long-term experiments have been done in terms of safety levels.

Further, no experiments have been done to determine the safety levels from the pulsed microwaves exhibited by all microwave communication systems.

Doctor Oberfield’s report concludes…..as a general rule cell towers should not be placed near schools.

The recent Stewart Report on page 31, states: ‘Where a base station is to be installed near a school or college, local consultation is also required prior to the submission of an application for Planning Permission’. Page 53, continues…we also recommend that the mobile phone industry should refrain from promoting the use of mobile phones by children.

Placing mobile transmitters in the vicinity of schools cannot discourage the use of mobile phones by children.

Only this last Christmas the German VERUM group which consists of twelve research groups from seven countries, concluded that mobile phones cause DNA damage. It can be argued that as responsible adults in charge of Planning, giving the opportunity to children to use mobile phones, some responsibility MUST fall on the Planners for the scientific ignorance of the children.

Referring back to semi-scientific and/or anecdotal evidence concerning masts, at this present time in Osafia, Israel in the last four years, 165 people have died of cancer from living in the vicinity of antennas. This has now become a legal case.

Scientific research by Dr. John Walker has highlighted cancer clusters within the ‘footprint’ of base station transmissions.

Coloured photographs of cancer clusters can be found in the main part of base station beams.
Theoretically, looking at this research, which has covered several transmitters, it should be possible to predict future cancer clusters.

Dr. Walker’s research is on the Internet.

General practitioners in Naila examined the medical histories of nearly 1000 patients, searching for link between the distance of the patient’s living quarters from a long-standing mobile phone base station and the incidence of cancer. The physicians distinguished between an inner circle, within a 400m radius from the tower, and the area outside it. Tumours were found in patients living within 400m of the base station three times more frequently than among patients living outside.

The result of the Naila study, November 2004 shows that the proportion of newly developing cancer cases was significantly higher among those patients who had lived during the past 10 years at a distance of up to 400 m from the transmitter site, and that the patients fell ill on average 8 years earlier.

A similar study from the National Institute of Sciences (Professor Santini) showed from a study of 270 men and 260 women less than 300 m from a transmitter, showed signs of nausea, loss of appetite, visual and motor problems. Less than 100 m the symptoms were irritability, depression, concentration problems, memory dysfunction, dizziness, libido problems, headaches, sleep and skin problems.


Posted: 16 Dec 2005 03:04
by Eileen O´Connor


http://www.mast-victims.org/forum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=1&topic=56

Bookmark and Share

Educational and Informational Purposes: All information on this site and all links that are linked to from StayOnTheTruth.com represent solely the opinions of their producers.

This information and links to more information are made available to you as a resource for your own research and evaluation not as an endorsement.

StayOnTheTruth.com is not in the business of persuading you or anyone else to believe anything that that is presented linked to from this site; however, it does encourage you to use all available resources to form your own judgement about very important things that affect your life.  

Fair Dealing and Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair dealing' or 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in copyright law. In accordance with the Fair Dealing or Fair Use intention, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair dealing' or 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice. 

Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Make a Free Website with Yola.