With all of the negative news that we read in the daily paper, I just had to tell you about a blessing I received recently from one of our local postal workers.

The Bermuda Social Work Council held its annual awards luncheon yesterday at the Inlet Restaurant at the Palmetto Bay Hotel, a culmination of all of the activities for Social Work Month. Several weeks ago, I ordered pencils, buttons, mugs and other give-a-ways from the National Association of Social Workers to be given to those attending the luncheon and had given up hope that they would arrive on time.

On Friday I arrived home at 5.30 to find a notice that my package had finally arrived. I knew the Warwick Post Office was closed but tried to call anyway, with no luck. I then called the General Post Office for assistance. A very nice lady offered to help and called me back within ten minutes to tell me that a Mrs. Stevens would meet me at the post office at 8.30 a.m. on Saturday morning. Yes, on Saturday. I could not believe it.

The next morning I arrived at the Post Office and Mrs. Stevens arrived as promised. She had actually gotten up early on a Saturday morning to get me the package I so desperately needed. I could not thank her enough.

On behalf of The Bermuda Social Work Council I would like to take a moment to publicly thank Mrs. Stevens for extending herself beyond the call of duty. Her assistance was greatly appreciated and her gesture of kindness helped to make our Luncheon a success. I would also like to thank the lady who called Mrs.

Stevens at home on my behalf (sorry I did not get your name).

Also we would like to thank the following companies for their donations of gifts and prizes: The Bersalon Group of Companies, The Marriott Castle Harbour Hotel, The International Sports Shop, Janauzi's Hair Salon, Body Essentials, True Reflections, Brighton Nurseries, Metro Mineral Co., Fisherman's Reef, Bombay Bicycle Club, The Phoenix Centre, The MarketPlace Ltd., and Gardine's Flowers & Things.

Thank you all for making our luncheon a success. Finally I would like to extend congratulations to Mrs. Renee Brown who was named the 1999 Social Worker of The Year.

LISA CANN Chairperson Social Committee Bermuda Social Work Council Cell tower claims refuted March 28, 1999 Dear Sir, I have followed the Warwick cell phone tower controversy with interest. I have attempted to confirm many of the statements made by CARE and CARE supporters.

While doing so, I corresponded with Sir Richard Doll, Dr. William Leiss, and Dr. John Moulder, a cancer researcher at the Medical College of Wisconsin, among others. I would like to thank them for their patience.

CARE and CARE supporters have claimed that: "The US EPA have disputed the FCC safety guidelines for cell phone tower radiation emissions.'' Not true. In fact, the EPA has issued a written approval of the FCC guidelines. In a letter dated July 25, 1996 to Reed Hunt, Chairman of the FCC, Carol Browner, Director of the EPA, said that "(w)e have reviewed...FCC draft of July 2, 1996, in the Matter of Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radio frequency Radiation. This new approach...addresses our concerns about adequate protection of public health. I commend you for taking this approach...'' It has also been claimed that: "An October 1998 conference in Vienna, attended by Dr. William Leiss among others, resolved that the health effects of RF were scientifically established. The conference fully endorses the claims made by Dr. David Carpenter''. I asked Dr. Leiss to confirm this. "The consensus,'' he replied, "included the statement to the effect that `non-thermal' biological effects are scientifically established... However, `effects' are not necessarily `adverse health effects', and this is where confusion sometimes arises...my understanding of the current science does not support the statement that there are `serious harmful effects'.'' Another claim was that "Sir Richard Doll, the scientist who found the first link between smoking and cancer, has called for a radiation study in the UK''.

Not true. "I cannot recall having ever backed a proposal for studying the health effects of cell phone towers,'' replied Sir Richard to my inquiry, "But I have supported proposals to study the health of men who work professionally on radio towers who may at times be heavily exposed.'' CARE's most intriguing claim was that "Salzburg, Austria has established a limit were 0.1 micro Watts/sq.cm. Not only is this not true, it is worth noting that if such a limit were to be established and enforced in Bermuda it could prohibit all local television and FM radio broadcasts. However, cell phone towers emit extremely weak levels of RF radiation, and probably would not be adversely affected by such a law. In the case of the Warwick tower, for example, the proposed emitter, under normal working conditions, would emit RF radiation at approximately 0.1 microWatts/sq.cm. In any case, Salzburg adheres to the Austrian standard, and not 0.1 microWatts/sq.cm. Salzburg has no legal authority to deviate from the Austrian standard, any more than the people of New South Wales have the legal authority to deviate from the Australian standard. Or, as Dr. Moulder put it, "(i)f New South Wales has its own local standards then this is news to people in Australia.'' On more than one occasion CARE and CARE supporters have talked about the effects of EMF. It is unfortunate that they have done so. The topic of EMF is completely different from that of the RF radiation emitted by cell phone towers. "`Scientifically they are different,'' replied Dr. Moulder to my inquiry, "From both a biological and a physical point of view. Many `activists' mix the two together as though `EMF was a monolithic thing'.'' In a recent letter, ("Dr. Carpenter is Correct'', March 26, 1999), the qualifications of Dr. Carpenter have been defended by a CARE supporters. I reiterate: although Carpenter has aired his opinions on numerous occasions, he has never once backed up his opinions with original research of his own.

Further, with regard to the Australian study that used cancer-prone mice, it should be remembered that this study was not done to determine the effects of RF radiation on cancer-prone people. The reason for using cancer-prone mice in this kind of experiment is that it maximises the researcher's chance of finding something, if in fact there is anything to be found. Once the initial data is in from the first round of experiments, then the next round can be planned. This procedure has nothing to do with determining the effects of RF radiation on cancer-prone humans.

Two rules for the PLP March 25, 1999 Dear Sir, Order 30 of the Bermuda Constitution Order, 1968 states: "No person shall be qualified to be elected as a Member of the House of Assembly who is by virtue of his own act under any acknowledgement or allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power or state''.

There are the following facts: 1. Prior to 1993 a member of the Progressive Labour Party swore allegiance to a foreign power.

2. In 1993 that member of the PLP was elected as a Member of the House of Assembly.

3. After the time had expired for elections to be challenged, it became known that the member of the House of Assembly who is also a member of the PLP had sworn allegiance to a foreign power.

4. That member of the PLP then stated that the leaders of the party knew that he had sworn allegiance to a foreign power.

5. That member of the PLP, once it became known that he had sworn allegiance to a foreign power, did not immediately thereafter either resign his seat in the House of Assembly of renounce his allegiance to a foreign power.

6. Immediately prior to the 1998 election, that Member of the House of Assembly renounced his allegiance to a foreign power and was then properly elected.

7. The same Order 30 also states that a person shall not qualify to be elected as a Member of the House of Assembly if he is a Senator. 8. A member of the United Bermuda Party was a Senator and may have been a Senator at the time of nomination. That is a matter for the courts.

9. That member of the United Bermuda Party who is now no longer a member of the Senate is a candidate for the House of Assembly in the coming by-election.

10. A member of the PLP Parliamentarian group commenced legal proceedings against the United Bermuda Party candidate in the by-election.

It would seem from the above facts that the Progressive Labour Party has one set of rules for its members and another set of rules for the United Bermuda Party members.

Jesus Christ had powerful things to say to people who have one set of rules for themselves and another set of rules for others.

You Preachers who are Progressive Labour Party Cabinet Ministers, you Preachers you are Progressive Labour Party members of Parliament, you Preachers who voted for the Progressive Labour Party at the last election, preach it to them.

PETER J.C. SMITH City of Hamilton White uniforms are good March 26, 1999 Dear Sir, With reference to a letter written on March 25, 1999 Headed "Our side of the story'', signed "Know the Facts'', I wish to respond to the challenge offered by the writer who wishes to hear from anyone who disputes the comments made in their letter.

I an a registered nurse of long standing. I was trained at Guy's Hospital in London and have nursed in many countries.

I am shocked to think that any well trained nurse would attend a patient in shoes and clothing of her choosing and long polished fingernails. Everyone knows that nails, especially long polished fingernails, hold infection and if they are not trimmed, more than likely carry germs.

There is another danger also, that someone off the street, can enter the ward, possibly be unbalanced and interfere with the patient. A uniform such as the forces, the police and hopefully nurses gives the patient an added feeling of security and in most cases an assurance that the person is genuine.

A regularised uniform (in my opinion preferably white) with white laced shoes, hair neatly tied back, no jewellery and trimmed fingernails, should be the essence of pride that the nurse has in her profession.

The very highest of standards must at all times be protected, aspired to and maintained, which I sincerely hope the hospital administration will uphold and support.

If a nurse finds these standards tiresome, I would suggest she is in the wrong profession.

DIANA WILLIAMS Pembroke