Cellphones and the NIMBY problem

A list member on a forum I’m on wrote to the list this week warning of the dangers of cellphone antennas in residential areas.  It seems that one of the cellphone companies placed an antenna in her building and now she’s frantic about the possible dangers she’s exposed to.  Upon question she admitted that she’s a cellphone user herself but would be willing to accept worse reception in order to get rid of this antenna.

It seems to me that this hypocrisy is a classic example of NIMBY (Not In My BackYard).  It’s one thing for someone like myself to object to cellphone antennas (I refuse to have one of the electronic slave collars even if I’m the last in Israel to remain without one).  But for someone who uses a cellphone to object to having an antenna in their own building seems to me hypocritical.  Yes, I realize there are those of you who’ll say “well a phone is a minor power source but an antenna is far more powerful energy source and far more likely to cause damage to those in its immediate area.”  This is true but the antennas still have to be SOMEwhere in order to be of any use and they have to be in proximity to where there are users (what use is an antenna stuck somewhere out in the field?  Do cows need to have good reception while reporting their milk supply in to the dairy?!)

The question is only one of who suffers in order that the majority have good reception.  It seems to me that anyone who has a cellphone enters themselves into a lottery for this risk.  To expect good reception wherever one goes yet object to others getting it in their own area seems to me hypocrisy.