h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

At the moment, mobile phone use is increasing, and as a result the various networks want to put up more masts to give better coverage to users. As soon as it is anounced that a network would like to put a mast then someone will start a campaign to have the erection of the mast stopped, or at the very least moved to another location. These protests are often supported by information that compares radiation from mobile phones to that of nuclear waste, and other inaccurate science. They can even produce petitions with hundreds of signatures. My question is "do the people who sign these petitions have a right to protest about masts?"

A bit of hunting around the web told me that there are about 50million mobile phones in the UK out of a population of 60million or so. Take off a few phones for the ones that have fallen out of use, are broken or otherwise out of service, and you still have a pretty high percentage of the population that owns or uses a mobile phone. So should we have a right to complain about the increase of mobile phone masts when it is the market that is driving the increase? Many people would complain if they couldn't get a mobile service.

In future I will only isten to complaints about the proliferation of mobile masts from people who do not use mobile phones. And I would define a mobile user as a person who:
A. Owns a mobile phone
B. Has ever used a landline to phone a mobile phone.
C. Is given a mobile as part of their employment.
D. Has ever used a service or organisation that relies on mobile phones for communication, such as car breakdown services or self employed tradespersons.

I think we should still monitor the risks, as absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but for the moment I feel that the benefits of mobile masts far outweighs their risks.

Oh, and if a mobile network wants to put a mast at the bottom of my garden, they are more than welcome - I hear that they pay pretty good for the site rental!