Profile picture for PhilipSigitov

Is living near a cell phone tower dangerous

Hello, I recently found a 1 ac lot for sale. When I was driving by it I found that one of neighbors has a cell phone tower on their property. The cell phone tower would be about 50 to 100 meters away from where I'd what to build the house. There are also plenty of neighbors there living close to the tower. I was wondering If that is safe, and if you would buy the lot if you had the choice to.      
  • February 24 2014 - Spokane Valley
  • 0
    0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Be a Good Neighbor. Be respectful and on-topic. No spam or self-promotion! See our Good Neighbor Policy.

Answers (30)

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
As for the pies, most of the positive benefits of apples have been "cooked out" of most pies, and the added sugar and corn starch cause added health problems. Unless one knows how the pies have been prepared, one is best off steering away from the pies.

And if artificial sweeteners were used in the pies as well? One popular artificial sweetener turns into formaldehyde when heated, so eat it at your own risk if you enjoy stuffing yourself with "poison".
  • December 16 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
A huge number of studies have been done regarding the health impacts of various kinds of apples as well. Generally, most apples have positive health benefits in reasonable quantities and help improve the immune system. "Reasonable" would be less than 10 per day. "Unreasonable" would be more than 3000 per day per person. Fuji apples would be on the positive benefits list, mostly due to the pectin in the apples. On the negative impact list, "red delicious" has very little positive benefit, and ranks at the top of the list for negative health impacts.

And that is even before considering treatment during growing, harvesting, transportation, and distribution. If treated with pesticides and eaten without sufficient washing, the negative effects are multiplied.
  • December 16 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for user55320395

Few people in the world know that no form of eating 2 apple pies per day, over a long period of time, does NOT cause cancer, so the obvious

conclusion is that: "eating 2 apple pies per day, over a long period of time COULD cause cancer".  No more apple pies for me.

RF, microwave radiation is NOT ionizing radiation. I really hope that the millions of mice that gave their lives to save ours, didn't die in vain

because ignorant people haven't taken the time to read the thousands of studies, on both sides of the radiation fence, that have been

performed over the years to solve the mysteries of all kinds of radiation.

"Garsh, I'm too stupid to read, but You don't  have to know how to read to know it's a guvmint cover up".

Don't get Me started on Mercola.

  • December 16 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for victoriousproductins
Hundreds of cell phone towers have been removed from neighborhoods in India to protect citizens,
and in Brazil 7000 death have been linked to living too close to a cell phone tower.
  The sources is "Natural News".
   However, the WHO says such radiation is only 'possibly' carcinogenic, and classed as a class B carcinogen equal to being in an enclosed room filled with second hand smoke or drinking DDT, an illegalized insecticide that wiped out bird populations all over the world about 20 years ago.. 
  • September 03 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
The FCC licensing doesn't even attempt to cover long term health impacts for those susceptible.  It is the cumulative impact of the energy absorbed at a given frequency that is the issue for such things as soft-tissue cancers, and the time between exposures so that the body has time to heal and recover.
  • August 05 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

There is no reason to use a Geiger counter, for one it measures radiation not radio frequency... According to what I have found I'm pretty sure you can have the FCC measure it to ascertain if it is within safe limits.

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phone-towers
  • August 05 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
Another product (from a company that rents):
http://www.atecorp.com/products/rohde-schwarz/fsh3.aspx

(You really need to do a search and call around, and do comparative price checking, Hundreds of products on the market that would do what you need from multiple manufacturers; and many companies to buy or rent from, new or used).
  • February 28 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
As you are looking for an EMF meter (or spectrum analyzer) and NOT a Geiger Counter, you might want to check aArizonaUSA.com
http://www.aaroniausa.com/spectrananalyzers.shtml?gclid=CI7C7dub77wCFY6Rfgodd0MA6Q

OR
Techtronics
http://www.tek.com/spectrum-analyzer

OR
Microlease.com
http://www.microlease.com/ProductSpecification.aspx?basemodelID=4024
(I think that specific product is a substantial "overkill" for your needs...)

(The Yellow pages did not turn up any local electronics rental or measurement or test company in Spokane Washington)
  • February 28 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for sunnyview
"Does anyone know were I can rent a geiger counter?"

That is a good question. Hospitals have them in specific labs so do universities. You may be able to to ask them, but it is unlikely that they wold loan or rent them out. I would ask a local granite dealer or even a home inspector.

Some people were concerned with radiation from certain types of granite so one of those people or businesses may have one that they use for that purpose. It might be worth a few phone calls. If that doesn't work, you can also find geiger counters on ebay and there are videos on YouTube about how to use them. Hope it helps.
  • February 28 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
"I would also note that since that 2008 study the signals emitted by the towers are likely considerably different, now containing more data" -

The study included transmissions both in the 800 Mhz range and the 1.5 Ghz range.  Data transmissions are typically in the Giga Hertz range, as they have more bandwidth; and that was the portion of the frequency spectrum that the FCC allocated to them.  A meter measuring EMF power per cross section area up to the 3.5 Ghz range should be sufficient.

(WiFi is typically in the 2.4 Ghz range.  That is what the FCC allocated to them).

Yes, more data may mean more power; but as the data is sent in digital packets, it may not.  The issue is the power is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, so a phone transmitting next to your ear will typically have more power at sensitive soft tissue, than a tower antenna 100 feet away... but it again depends on aiming... so measure it!
  • February 27 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
You don't use a Geiger counter to measure EMF... you use it primarily to measure alpha particles and beta particles from radioactive materials, like granite counter tops, and Radon in the soil.  Sure, you can also use it to measure gamma rays in the EMF spectrum at the high end, mostly from radioactive sources; but the Cell tower EMF transmissions are not in the Gamma Ray part of the spectrum, but down it 800 Mhz, or 1.5 Ghz range.

(Gamma rays are in the 30Ehz to 300Ehz range.)
M is 10^6
G is 10^9
T is 10^12
P is 10^15
E is 10^18

(Visible light is in the 400 Thz to 790 Thz range).

You generally want a EMF meter or EMF probe or RF field strength meter, or EMF radiation Dosimeter for measuring EMF; and you want it to measure it power per area (such as micro Watts per square meters).  Ideally you want a scanner to scan a large set of frequencies and measure that power at each frequency level.  Recorders are also available, for setting it up for a time period, to measure changes in EMF power over extended time periods (hour, day, week...)

Some test labs will measure for you, and some will rent the equipment.

Lutron (a dimmer manufacturer) has a nice digital EMF meter for power (30 hz to 300 hz), but that would be useless in the cell phone transmission range.

Some ghost hunter shops sell some low cost equipment.  Radio Shack has typically had one for the Microwave frequencies (for checking leakage on microwave doors).


A TES92 would do a good job for cell phone transmission signals.

Local electronic rental shops should be able to give you some clues who stocks them.  And you can always do an internet search.
  • February 27 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for PhilipSigitov
Does anyone know were I can rent a geiger counter?
  • February 27 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Pasadenan wrote:  "I'm not about to try to interpret their study; there are way too many factors that determine increased risks, including family history, stress, specific genetics, . . .."

I wonder if you'd also have to account for the brand of cell phone tower (or other type of signal), since different companies use greatly different frequencies (or at least they used to).  

I would also note that since that 2008 study the signals emitted by the towers are likely considerably different, now containing more data (as opposed to voice) transmission.  And for data, I don't think LTE was even implemented in the US back in 2010, so yet another change.
  • February 27 2014
  • 1Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
I noticed a post today on a thread about home proximity to high voltage power lines that referenced a study in the British Journal of cancer.  The post indicated a 1.14% increase in risk of cancer for every 0.2 micro Tesla.... but that is not even the right units for measuring EMF; that is for measuring Magnetic Fields... so even if there was such a study, the poster remembered the conclusion data wrong or copied it wrong, or made it up.

So, I went looking for the study... and found one regarding cell phone frequencies that was conducted in Japan, but also published in the British Journal of Cancer:
http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v98/n3/full/6604214a.html

The threshold where they noticed a slight measurable increased risk was 10 watt-hours/Kg exposure.

I'm not about to try to interpret their study; there are way too many factors that determine increased risks, including family history, stress, specific genetics, proximity to soft tissue/organ areas that may be more sensitive, time away from expose, cumulative exposure, peak exposure, duration of peak exposure, repetitiveness of peak exposure, age...

But at least it is one recent "reference point".  The study was published Feb 5, 2008.
  • February 26 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for user6064703
Pasadenan, they actually do link to those studies: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phones

However, you are 100% correct in saying that Mercola is a quack.  He's a favorite of bored mommy bloggers, nothing more.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
Some people consider Dr Mercola a quack.

Regardless, they only exist to sell "nutrition products".

I have no use for their articles or "studies".  They are more "useless" than the American cancer society previously linked.

There are good longitudinal studies on the effects of extensive cell phone usage, and the slight increase of risk of forming brain tumors (a form of cancer).  But you are not going to find those linked on either of those two sites.

And as already mentioned, even in close proximity to a tower, the exposure for most people from the tower will be LESS than 1 hr per day of cell phone usage (unless of course one doesn't hold the phone to the ear, doesn't keep the phone transmitting near the waist, and doesn't use blue-tooth devices attached to the ear).

If in doubt, measure it yourself.  The meters are available for rent.
  • February 25 2014
  • 1Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

I would NOT!! When clients ask me about the dangers of EMFs from power lines and cell phone towers I direct them to mercola.com. I always tell people, there will be something better without the possible health risk. I wouldn't take the chance with my health and the health of my family.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Dan Tabit
Philip,
As the argument continues you can see that there are no clear answers. People are passionate about the issue on both sides, so your consideration should be; where are you comfortable on the issue and at resale time are you prepared for any consequences that may come such as a longer marketing time and potentially lower appreciation?
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
The list they give of radiation is not at all complete; they are mostly listing EMF; and have ignored Alpha Particles, Beta particles, and Neutron radiation.

All forms of radiation HAS been shown to cause cancer in high enough doses for extended time periods.

And even Low frequency EMF ionizes the air around high voltage 60 hertz power lines.  And for DC transmission?  Zero EMF, zero hertz; but it still causes ionization.  Negative ions in the air has generally been considered to have positive health effects.  Live stock around high voltage DC lines tend to have strange behavioral patterns.

Anyway, it doesn't much matter what cancer societies and cancer institutes think.  They exist to collect money to do perpetual research.  If they ever did anything "useful", they would put themselves "out of business", so they don't.  Besides, as 501C3 non profit tax exempt organizations, a very large portion of the money they receive never goes to cancer research nor treatments; it goes to "fund-raising" which they call "outreach" as part of their "educational" mission.

So the article linked really states there is absolutely no risk of any kind from exposure to microwave radiation???  Nor infrared radiation?  Oh, they mean if you get "cooked" or "burned", or atoms re-aligned, that is not a "health risk" and not cancer, and not cancer causing?

And radiation is not the only cause of cancer; chemical exposure and viruses can cause it too.

As stated, you are free to do your own research....
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for user6064703
Pasadenan:
Many forms of radiation have not been linked with cancer.  If you disagree with me, maybe you'll believe the American Cancer Society, which says "But there are different types of radiation, and many of them are not linked to cancer."  I believe you are confusing ionizing radiation with non-ionizing radiation.  Source: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/medicaltreatments/radiation-exposure-and-cancer

It's obvious that you are talking about a topic on which you have no actual knowledge.  You shouldn't come onto a public forum and spread nonsense when there's no scientific backing for your claims. 
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
"many of those have not been shown to cause cancer." -

No form of radiation has ever been shown to "not cause cancer" when given in sufficient doses for extended periods of time... not even "green light".

Sure, you are welcome to do the "studies" and spend the next 350 years and $250 billion dollars doing so.  Some would call that "cruelty to animals".  Regardless, it is a very inefficient method of knowing something "today" that people don't even want to pay to test for "tomorrow".

Industry is not going to pay for and do the studies unless it "demonstrates" their products are "safe" under normal usage conditions.  Government is not going to pay for and do the studies when their debt exceeds the gross national product and when it is a low priority for the politicians and the voters.  Universities are not going to do the studies unless they can get funding for them.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for user6064703
Pasadenan is speaking some hogwash.  There are many types of radiation, and many of those have not been shown to cause cancer.  Also, a defect in DNA is not necessarily the same as cancer.  Cancer is unconstrained mitosis.  Many DNA defects either have no effect or have effects that are far different from cancer.  Either way, it's a leap to assume that cell phone cause DNA changes.  One certainly DOES need a scientific study in order to support that claim.

The truth is that there have been studies done, and none of those have shown a significant link between cell phones and cancer.  However, that doesn't mean that one doesn't exist or that living by a tower doesn't come with risk.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
"I would focus on the visibility of tower from your building site and find out the wattage of the tower. Then weigh for yourself what the risk to you actually is based on the site and on your gut feeling about it." -

I certainly would focus on the visibility, and affect on "views".  But not only the wattage of the tower is of concern, but orientation of the antennas and relative height of the antennas.  If one was "really concerned", it would probably be easier to just go and rent a meter, and measure the radiation in the frequencies of interest, at the specific site locations of interest.  And one wants to do that when call volume is high; the power transmission will be less if no one is receiving communication from the tower.

The towers are supposed to be high enough to clear obstacles on the transmission and reception.  But often local codes and design review and public comment limit the height.  If one is on a hill next to the tower, the living room "could" be the same height as the antennas.  One can easily go to the site location and measure the relative height of the antennas.  And if one was concerned about excessive EMF radiation and was building "new" one could put in some additional shielding, if it was a concern.

Sorry about the typo on my previous post;  there are 10 TONS of nukes for every person in the U.S.  Really, how many people would want to have 10 tons of dynamite stored in their garage?  And yet we do the equivalent.

As for health effects of radiation?  One doesn't need a scientific study or published report to figure that out.  The DNA sequence has "redundancy", so changes to the DNA are not a "simple process"; but viruses and radiation cause mutations in the DNA.  In most cases, the body can deal with a small number of these "changes", and remove the defects.  But if it gets "over whelmed"?  That is what we call "cancer".  Many different kinds of cancer, and many different parts of the body have different susceptibilities to various cancers.   And different people have different risks and susceptibility to cancer.  And diet, and exercise, and stress also play a factor on cancer growth or cancer remission.   It is all "statistically measurable", but in practice, that is not the way people make decisions.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for sunnyview
There is radiation from cell phone towers. The cell industry has many studies "impying" no long term health effects at all. The cell phone tower opponents have many studies "implying" scattered health effects that vary from study to study. The state DPH agencies imply safety, but warn of possible issues. Not very helpful.

The truth is that no one really knows what the effects might be. Based on what I have read, the effects for a normal tower are probably fairly low, but not nonexistent. Every choice has risk. For example, buying on a high traffic street or near a highway can increase a child's risk for asthma. Not every child on those streets will get asthma, but the risk in that population increases overall due to airborne particulates.

I wish I could provide you with quality research, but much of the research I've seen is carries significant bias. I would focus on the visibility of tower from your building site and find out the wattage of the tower. Then weigh for yourself what the risk to you actually is based on the site and on your gut feeling about it.
  • February 25 2014
  • 2Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for user6064703
It seems as though everyone here is dodging your question.  And one or two of these people might be lunatics.

According to the National Cancer Institute, no consistent link has been established between cell phones and cancer.  However, it's doubtful that the scope of the studies encompassed the amount of waves one would be exposed to when living next to a tower.  
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
"If you really wanted to be save you'd need to move very far out" -

If you "really" wanted to be safe... you would need to leave the U.S. ... the U.S. has the largest stock-pile of weapons of mass destruction in the world... Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear.  3 TONS of Nukes for every person living in the U.S.; over 5110 nuclear warheads, and that doesn't include the full stock of "retired" weapons that were supposed to be dismantled that weren't, nor does it include all the "nuclear waste" that the government is responsible for storing and securing.  Nor does it included exposed uranium from mining operations.  And the U.S. keeps building MORE nuclear weapons; supposedly to replace those they plan to retire; all "approved" by Congress.

And EMF radiation of various frequencies doesn't even begin to address alpha radiation, beta radiation, and gamma radiation, nor the chemical pollutants that the government intentionally puts in the air and in the water, nor the lack or regulations on mega business that use such chemicals or radiation or biological hazards.

The U.S. Government has never cared about the health of individuals; they only care about being able to threaten other countries for the benefit of the mega U.S. corporations and financial interests of billionaires.

The sad part is that hackers in both India and China already know how to detonate the U.S. weapons remotely, so the U.S. has set ourselves up for "suicide".

But where do you go?  If a nuclear war, the nuclear fallout will cover the entire northern hemisphere.  Antarctica is not only too cold, but insufficient food and energy supply to survive there alone without imports, especially in the "winter" which is our "summer".  Australia?  They are part of the 5-eyes as well.

And even if you take care all the chemical, biological, and radiation risks, there are still volcanoes, tornadoes, hurricanes, typhoons, floods, mudslides, earthquakes,  fires, and car and truck collisions.

Yes, it is easy to "calculate the risks"... but when it comes right down to it, people don't, and they don't care; it is a "choice", not a probability theory exercise, nor an insurance industry actuarial table.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

I've lived near towers for years, and seemingly it causes hair loss, GERDS, memory loss and an overall loss of physical condition.  Either that, or I'm getting old.

Seriously, as others have mentioned there's really no way of knowing, or if there is, this scientific news has not yet reached real estate agents.  I would add that there are a lot of other similar types of electromagnetic (or whatever) exposure.  You have TV and radio signals, wi-fi for you and your neighbors, and even wireless mice.  Each type of signal might have different risks, but depending on your location, the cell phone tower signals might be weaker than other signals.  Or if in a remote location, your overall exposure to cell phone signals still might be weaker than other places because not all the companies would have good coverage in that area.  If I had to guess, the worse location possible for this issue would be downtown Seattle office buildings, where you'd be blasted by at least 5 TV signals, countless radio signals, satellite signals and a ton of cell phone coverage.  Your one acre lot probably gets a lot less total signal (but again, different signals may pose different risks--no one really knows).

My point is simply that there may be a lot of variables to take into a account which are not as obvious because they don't have the tower present to alert you to the issue.  If you really wanted to be save you'd need to move very far out (or at least behind a large hill), and then you'd only need to worry about DirecTV, SiriusXM, etc.
  • February 25 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

I think Pasadenan makes an excellent point - would you buy the lot if it had no cell phone reception?

  • February 24 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Blue in d Nile
There are lots of different ways to measure "danger", and "acceptable risks".

Perhaps, if the tower is close enough to fall on your house in a heavy windstorm, it might be an issue.

And a big issue is where the antennas are aimed.  Are they aimed "at" your house, or "above" your house, or "away" from your house?  And do you think someone will tamper with the antennas to point them at your house?  You are exposed to EMF radiation every day; but you don't particularly want to increase the amount of exposure without good reason, nor the amount of time of the exposure.  That said, you get an awful lot more exposure using a cell phone for an hour a day; EMF is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source, and proportional to the amount of transmission power used.

Would I buy the lot?  No, it is cheaper to buy already built than to build custom; and if I had the desire and money to build custom, that is not what I would choose.  Not to mention, not everything is a "safety" issue; some things are aesthetic issues.  What does this "tower" look like?  A palm tree, a fir tree, or an over sized metal power pole with a big triangle on top with three vertical rectangular bars on each side?  I really don't want to look at that every day.

Resale value will almost always be somewhat less than if it didn't have the tower nearby too; except probably not as much less as an area that has "no cell phone service" and "no wireless internet service".

As in most of life, there are tradeoffs, and one has to choose what is acceptable to them and their family.
  • February 24 2014
  • 2Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.

Profile picture for Dan Tabit
Phillip,
We are not scientists and can't give you a definitive answer.  I can tell you that the question is out there and some people may believe it is, others don't.  I would suggest you research this from reputable scientific sources and beware of those who see danger in everything.  Determine for yourself if the potential risk is worth the investment and then consider that it could be a resale issue for you someday. 
Personally, I would live near a cell tower and enjoy the great service, but I know others who wouldn't.  You need to decide for yourself.
  • February 24 2014
  • 0Yes

  • Report a Problem

    Please enter a valid email address.

    Content flagged

    We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.

    We're sorry. This service is temporarily unavailable. Please come back later and try again.