⚠️ URGENT: Important Clarification on Industry Exclusion Zones ⚠️
The EM Radiation Research Trust recently issued a warning to the community regarding the industry’s MBNL “Small Cell Planning Guidance” document, which promotes exclusion zones of just 25–50 metres. Alarmingly, this document is being circulated by some grassroots campaigns without including independent, science-based recommendations that call for setbacks of at least 500 metres from homes and 1,000 metres from schools.
This risks unintentionally endorsing industry guidelines and may give councils, government, and telecom companies the opportunity to claim they are acting in line with residents’ wishes.
Emerging International Best Practice on Setbacks
Globally, several jurisdictions now mandate or recommend greater protection distances between wireless infrastructure and sensitive sites:
- Hawai‘i County, USA (2025): 600-foot (~183m) setbacks from homes and schools
Read more - Various U.S. jurisdictions: Recommend 500m from homes and 1,000m from schools
Read more - UK speaker and campaigner Ian Jarvis has compiled scientific sources and international examples supporting 500m setbacks as a precautionary standard
Read factsheet
The EM Radiation Research Trust respectfully urges that all future messaging or correspondence related to mast siting, zoning, and public health reflects precautionary principles to prevent confusion and avoid mixed signals to local authorities.
✅ Communications should prioritise:
• Legal credibility (statutory duties and case law)
• Scientific integrity (independent, peer-reviewed evidence)
• Public health protection (through clearly defined, precautionary zoning standards)
We repeat: This is an urgent message to ensure our campaigns stay strong, united, and based on sound independent science.
⚠️ Important Warning to All Campaigners and Concerned Residents:
Never use or share the industry zoning map without explicitly rejecting it.
If you fail to clearly challenge this map and fail to cite independent science calling for at least 500 metres setback from homes and 1,000 metres from schools, your silence or use of the industry map could be misinterpreted as community endorsement.
Why This Matters:
- The 500m/1,000m setback distances are minimum precautionary guidelines, grounded in independent scientific research focused on protecting public health.
- Experts warn that safer exposure limits depend on not just power levels, but also frequency, pulsation, and modulation of wireless signals.
- A growing scientific consensus demands biologically-based public exposure guidelines rather than the outdated thermal-only limits used by industry.
Key References Supporting Precautionary Setbacks:
- The BioInitiative Report: An authoritative review by international scientists urging stricter exposure limits, transparency, and protection for children and vulnerable groups.
- European Parliament Resolution 2008/2211(INI): Calls on EU member states to lower exposure limits and apply the precautionary principle in public health policy regarding EMF radiation.
- Access the full European Parliament Resolution 2008/2211(INI) here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2009-0216_EN.html
⚠️ Important Note on Using the 25–50m Industry Setback Figures in Campaigning:
The 25 to 50 metre setback distances promoted by industry groups such as MBNL represent a serious regulatory failure not only because these short distance guidelines are scientifically inadequate, but also because they are not made publicly available during planning decisions. We question whether planning officials even consider or are aware of these industry guidelines when approving infrastructure.
If you mention these figures, do so only to expose this failure. Never endorse or accept them as safe. Always accompany any reference to these setback distances with a clear and immediate rejection of their adequacy.
Instead, always pair your campaigning with independent research and expert recommendations calling for far larger setbacks. The community demands stronger protections that reject outdated thermal-based limits, which overlook biological effects and long-term health risks.
🔁 Help Us Avoid Mixed Messages
Please do not repeat or circulate industry zoning distances without a clear and explicit rejection and a firm reference to safer, independent international standards.
Without this, we fear these figures could be misused to justify mast deployments just 25–50 metres from our homes.
For guidance and support, please visit:
🌐 www.radiationresearch.org