I used to be fairly skeptical about claims cell phone towers might be a health hazard. I'm still skeptical, but in a different way. I am now shocked to discover that there really hasn't been any scientific studies done on the long term health effects of the low-level radiation emissions from towers.

But while I can't see how the cell phone companies can say with such certainty that there's no problem, I also can't support those who fall on the other side of the division and claim cell towers are dangerous to health. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) there really hasn't been any scientific study that can show one way or the other what hazards, if any, the emissions pose to humans living in their vicinity.

The whole issue illustrates the recurring conflicts that often occur when advances in technology move faster then science can in meeting social concerns about the hazards of such technology. Long term effects are difficult to measure without long term studies. Yet companies are compelled by the force of commerce to take advantage of the technology, or they'll lose to the competition.

The legal battle between Bermuda Digital Communications and the Fairmont Southampton Princess over the placement of a telecommunications tower at the site in Warwick can therefore be considered as a classic example of this divide. Bermuda Digital, a startup ready to compete with the Bermuda Telephone Co. Ltd., needs a tower on the site to provide cell phone service on the Island.

The Princess was ready to oblige. Area residents got organised and complained and the Princess' owners backed down. Various sides pulled in their experts who then had a field day in the editorial pages of The Royal Gazette. Now the battle is apparently being taken to the Supreme Court.

Fights over such towers has also erupted in the US. Cell phone companies have been throwing up the metal structures as high as 400 feet across the US in the mad rush to capture the growing and lucrative market. Some people are receiving rents from $400 to $1,700 a month for the placement of cell towers on their land. Wired Magazine recently reported on a church which leased its steeple for a one-time $500,000 fee.

The number of cell towers has risen to 74,000 by the end of last year from 24,800 in 1996. Cell towers emit electromagnetic radiation. The issue is over whether the low-frequency waves are harmful to humans. Opponents say they are potentially dangerous and more studies should be done to determine their health effects.

The US Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the structures, has adopted the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements guidelines to determine the amount of radiation emission allowed. The cell phone companies claim they comply with the guidelines, the same ones Telecommunications Minister Renee Webb said the Bermuda Government was using in determining whether the Warwick tower was safe.

However a recent news report in the US quoted a radiation specialist for the Environmental Protection Agency as stating that the guidelines only apply to acute, immediate exposure rather than long term effects of low-level emission.

"They were not intended to address the situation that the public is most concerned about, and that is chronic exposure,'' Environmental Protection Agency scientist Norbert Hankin was quoted as saying.

"As a result, there's really uncertainty about how protective the current guidelines are.'' That statement should make anyone, no matter how trusting they are, pause for some thought. The EPA itself has been blocked from determining the extent of the problem because it ran out of funding for the necessary studies about seven years ago. That impasse makes me think that big business -- that is the cell phone companies -- have somehow successfully lobbied the powers that be and in effect nipped in the bud any attempt to find out the truth of the matter.

Everyone, including the cell phone companies and their insurers, should now be pushing for all the relevant studies to be done as quickly as possible to determine that truth. My only regret is that in doing so, the move to a competitive telecommunications arena in Bermuda will be further held back as BTC capitalises on more delays.

What a great time for commentators the last week has been with the new media taking over the "old'' media. The announcement of the AOL-Time Warner merger must have made some old editors and some media owners choke on their sandwiches. What audacity! If anyone was still laughing that the Internet was just a passing fad, then I bet they aren't now.

The announcement certainly served as a wake up call for everyone. Spanish Industry Minister Josep Pique, in calling for Europe to get on the e-commerce train fast, noted that the merger, estimated at around $350 million, was equivalent to about 60 percent of Spain's gross domestic product.

Noting that AOL now has access to Time-Warner's 13 million cable customers, a few media advocates are warning of monopoly control of what people watch.

Noting that the AOL and Time Warner sites had a total combined audience of 47 million unique visitors in December, the merger was called a "giant media-Internet dictatorship'' in a joint statement by the Consumers Union, the Consumer Federation of America, the Media Access Project and the Centre for Media Education.

Meanwhile others were more positive. The Centre for Freedom in Technology, in labelling the deal as a means toward speedier service on the Internet, stated that the "politics of hate and greed are being replaced by productivity and cooperation.'' The International Federation of Journalists meanwhile warned against the control of information content and ownership of information delivery by one company. The Financial Times noted the deal as the first time in which "magic money is being used to buy real assets, and on a grand scale.'' After all Time Warner will contribute 85 per cent of the revenues and 80 per cent of the cash flow in the merged company.

Tech Tattle deals with topics relating to technology. Contact Ahmed at ahmedelamin yhotmail.com or (01133) 467012599.