On July 28, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) ordered utilities to install Home Area Network (HAN) devices and activate the second 2.4 ghz microwave antennae in the electric Smart Meter in 5000 CA homes. (P. 4 ” The decision orders PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E to each file a Tier 3 advice letter advice letter within four months to develop Smart Meter Home Area Network implementation plans specific to each. The plans must include an initial rollout of service to up to 5000 Home Area Network (HAN) devices that would allow HAN activation for early adopters upon request. … The full rollout shall require smart meters to transmit energy usage data to the home so that it can be received by a HAN device…”)
The industry/government partnered concept is that all new appliances will contain microwave antennas to operate in conjunction with the HAN, alerting consumers about their power consumption. What they don’t tell you is this HAN device will give utilities direct access into your home to turn on, or off your appliances, to control your electric use. What is not advertised is how the utilities will market data they collect from you to interested third parties, nor how microwave radiation was known to make people sick, is known to make people sick, is making people sick, and is now classified as a class 2B carcinogen by the WHO.
Will the utilities warn these 5000 homeowners of the health and safety risks of microwave radiation? NO they won’t. Will they investigate to see how near to the HAN or wireless meter people in the home sleep? NO they won’t. Will they inquire about age or immune sensitivity prior to installation of the HAN? No they won’t. Will they inquire about the use of other wireless medical devices? No they won’t. Will they disclose how often these microwaves will be transmitted, to and from the meter, HAN and appliances? No, they won’t. Will they prove that constant exposure to microwave radiation throughout your home is safe? No, they won’t. Meanwhile appliance manufacturers are gearing up to sell all new appliances with microwave transmitters to work with the HAN.
This directive to microwave 5000 homes was announced at the CPUC meeting, shortly after dozens of California ratepayers passionately implored the Commission to halt the radiation rollout. Speaker after speaker shared how the wireless meters were making them sick and even homeless. The first speaker stated that since the new meter was installed he was having headaches and President Peevey told him to talk to PG&E who were in the room and that they would help him. (really?) The last speaker stated he would help anyone who wanted to remove the meter and send it back to PG&E in pieces and he did not care if it was against the law, that he would do time for it. View the webcast of the CPUC meeting. Click on CPUC business meeting July 28, Archive Video Part 1.
Following pubic comments, Commissioner Simon expressed his disappointment in the industry and called on those who economically benefit from the technology to show up at public comments to educate the public domain (see 1:34:00 on the above referenced webcast) He said, “the public comment is very one sided…it puts me in a somewhat precarious position.”
President Peevey also stated his frustration over those opposing the meters and said, ” I think it’s kind of sad, that we had so many people here this morning talking to us about how this technology will allow people to know when they are doing their wash, and all that kind of stuff and they all walk out and have no interest in hearing us adopt something [privacy and security rules] that is fundamentally what they seek. It’s extremely frustrating, but I guess that goes with life in the fast lane and public service…” Then he laughs. President Peevey is ignoring the main reason people are speaking at public comments and asking for immediate relief, to have meters removed because they are making people sick.
The next opportunity to speak to the Commissioners is on August 18 at 9 am at the CPUC in SF. (505 Van Ness Ave.) Prepare a one minute statement. Bring a few friends- It’s going to take hundreds of people showing up and demanding a halt to this program.
California Public Utilities Commission,
Past and Present Members Board of Directors,
Southern California Edison
Governor Jerry Brown
SUBJECT: TEHACHAPI RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT IN CHINO HILLS
I write this letter on behalf of the City of Chino Hills, as our community is witnessing the invasion of 198-foot tubular steel poles erected through the heart of our City. These iron giants are massive beyond our worst expectations and tower over our neighborhoods; permanently and irrevocably impacting 1,000 families’ homes, churches, parks, and public facilities. We dread the additional looming impacts when the poles will be strung with six extremely high voltage lines.
We are outraged, disgusted, and disheartened over the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) cavalier dismissal of our community during the Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project’s review process. Our message to Californians… “Beware!” Southern California Edison, hiding under the cloak of delivering politically correct “green energy,” can get the CPUC’s approval to build anything on their existing rights-of-way with complete disregard for people impacted along the way and even disregard for their own standards. Our entire community is permanently disfigured by the CPUC’s decision.
This damage can never be mitigated. The reality for many families is that their children will grow up, playing in their own yards, under these massive double-circuit 500 kV power lines buzzing and crackling as their parents wonder if the proximity of their own backyards to these power lines will someday prove harmful to them. Most will be unable to sell their homes as they watch the value drop in an already depressed market. Unable to walk away from their homes, which represent their biggest investment, these families will suffer from the stress of this fear forever.
Families did choose to live next to a normal neighborhood 220 kV SCE transmission line, de-energized for nearly 40 years. Never did anyone expect that a CPUC review process would allow the construction of poles that climb to nearly 200 feet in a 150-foot easement, much less that they would be approved to carry double-circuit 500 kV power lines – a level of energy unheard of in residential neighborhoods throughout the entire United States. And SCE says “the residents knew the easement was there”. Talk about misleading.
The CPUC’s mission is to”regulate privately-owned electric companies and serve the public interest by protecting consumers and ensuring the provision of safe, reliable utility service and infrastructure at reasonable rates, with a commitment to environmental enhancement and a healthy California economy.” Clearly, the CPUC has abused its vast and unchecked regulatory powers by allowing SCE to construct the massive infrastructure which permanently alters our community’s way of life and damages our families.
In recent TV coverage, KABC Channel 7 reported,”The California Public Utilities Commission sided with SoCal Edison, saying in a statement that “there are overriding statewide values which outweigh the community values of Chino Hills:’
How clear is that statement from the CPUC? Very clear. For the record, the City of Chino Hills never opposed this renewable energy project. Instead we developed a RESPONSIBLE alternate proposal that would reduce the impact on our residents while allowing SCE to move forward to meet renewable energy mandates.
If the CPUC remained true to its mission, this route through the City of Chino Hills would have been deemed unsuitable due to its significant health and safety impacts. A legitimate review process would have eliminated the route through Chino Hills and required SCE to develop a viable alternative that would not harm existing residents. Instead, our City spent $2.4 million to identify and design a viable alternative that had the support of environmentalists. The CPUC should have required SCE to do so. During the hearings and testimony, we witnessed the relationship between the SCE executives and CPUC Commissioners and staff. What is now clear is that our small City, with limited resources, likely could never prevail against SCE, a giant corporate entity with vast rate-payer funded resources and close friends at the CPUC. The path of least resistance is not always the right path.
This SCE project represents the height of corporate irresponsibility and it has been blessed by the CPUC. I believe that it is time to evaluate the CPUC’s relationships with the public utilities and their effectiveness in regulating these utilities, which they are supposed to do on behalf of the people of California.
Californians beware…..your community may be next. Sincerely,
CITY OF CHINO HILLS
Mayor Ed Graham
Cell phones, cell towers, wi-fi, smart meters, DECT phones, cordless phones, baby monitors and other wireless devices all emit non ionizing radio frequencies, which the World Health Organization (WHO) has just classified as a potential carcinogen. This is big news from the WHO and governments and decision makers can no longer hide behind the “no RF health effects” industry mantra.
Cindy Sage, co-editor of the Bioinitiative Report writes, ” The WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer has just issued it’s decision that non-ionizing radiofrequency radiation is classified as a 2B (Possible) Carcinogen. This is the same category as DDT, lead, and engine exhaust. This mirrors the 2001 IARC finding that extremely low frequency (ELF-EMF) that classified as a 2B (Possible) Carcinogen. This pertained to power frequency (power line and appliance) non-ionizing radiation. These two findings confirm that non-ionizing radiation should be considered as a possible risk factor for cancers; and that new, biologically-based public safety standards are urgently needed. ”
Dr. Louis Slesin has been reporting on this issue for decades. See Microwave News, for further commentary.
Lyon, France, May 31, 2011 ‐‐
“The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use.
Over the last few years, there has been mounting concern about the possibility of adverse health effects resulting from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, such as those emitted by wireless communication devices. The number of mobile phone subscriptions is estimated at 5 billion globally.
From May 24–31 2011, a Working Group of 31 scientists from 14 countries has been meeting at IARC in Lyon, France, to assess the potential carcinogenic hazards from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. These assessments will be published as Volume 102 of the IARC Monographs, which will be the fifth volume in this series to focus on physical agents, after Volume 55 (Solar Radiation), Volume 75 and Volume 78 on ionizing radiation (X‐rays, gamma‐rays, neutrons, radio‐nuclides), and Volume 80 on non‐ionizing radiation (extremely low‐frequency electromagnetic fields).
The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed the possibility that these exposures might induce long‐term health effects, in particular an increased risk for cancer. This has relevance for public health, particularly for users of mobile phones, as the number of users is large and growing, particularly among young adults and children.
The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed and evaluated the available literature on the following exposure categories involving radiofrequency electromagnetic fields:
␣ occupational exposures to radar and to microwaves; ␣ environmental exposures associated with transmission of signals for radio, television and wireless telecommunication; and ␣ personal exposures associated with the use of wireless telephones.
International experts shared the complex task of tackling the exposure data, the studies of cancer in humans, the studies of cancer in experimental animals, and the mechanistic and other relevant data.
1 237 913 new cases of brain cancers (all types combined) occurred around the world in 2008 (gliomas represent 2/3 of these). Source: Globocan 2008
The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited2 among users of wireless telephones for glioma and acoustic neuroma, and inadequate3 to draw conclusions for other types of cancers. The evidence from the occupational and environmental exposures mentioned above was similarly judged inadequate. The Working Group did not quantitate the risk; however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period).
Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that “the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk.”
“Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings,” said IARC Director Christopher Wild, “it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐ term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting. ”
The Working Group considered hundreds of scientific articles; the complete list will be published in the Monograph. It is noteworthy to mention that several recent in‐press scientific articles4 resulting from the Interphone study were made available to the working group shortly before it was due to convene, reflecting their acceptance for publication at that time, and were included in the evaluation.
A concise report summarizing the main conclusions of the IARC Working Group and the evaluations of the carcinogenic hazard from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (including the use of mobile telephones) will be published in The Lancet Oncology in its July 1 issue, and in a few days online.
2 ‘Limited evidence of carcinogenicity’: A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered by the Working Group to be credible, but chance, bias or confounding could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence.
3 ‘Inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity’: The available studies are of insufficient quality, consistency or statistical power to permit a conclusion regarding the presence or absence of a causal association between exposure and cancer, or no data on cancer in humans are available.
4 a. ‘Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case‐ control study’ (the Interphone Study Group, in Cancer Epidemiology, in press) b. ‘Estimation of RF energy absorbed in the brain from mobile phones in the Interphone study’ (Cardis et al., Occupational and Environmental Medicine, in press)
c. ‘Risk of brain tumours in relation to estimated RF dose from mobile phones – results from five Interphone countries’ (Cardis et al., Occupational and Environmental Medicine, in press) ”
May 27, 2011
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), meeting in Kyiv at Standing Committee level, today called on European governments to “take all reasonable measures” to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, “and particularly the exposure to children and young people who seem to be most at risk from head tumours”.
According to parliamentarians, governments should “for children in general, and particularly in schools and classrooms, give preference to wired Internet connections, and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises”, and put in place information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of potentially harmful long-term biological effects on the environment and on human health, especially “targeting children, teenagers and young people of reproductive age”.
Following the proposals of the rapporteur (Jean Huss, Luxembourg, SOC), the Assembly called on governments to provide information on potential health risks of DECT-type wireless telephones, baby monitors and other domestic appliances which emit continuous pulse waves, if all electrical equipment is left permanently on standby. They should, instead, recommend “the use of wired, fixed telephones at home or, failing that, models which do not permanently emit pulse waves”.
Governments should “reconsider the scientific basis for the present electromagnetic fields exposure standards set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection, “which have serious limitations” and apply as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principles.
The adopted resolution underlines the fact that “the precautionary principle should be applicable when scientific evaluation does not allow the risk to be determined with sufficient certainty” and stresses that “the issue of independence and credibility of scientific expertise is crucial” to achieve a transparent and balanced assessment of potential negative impacts on the environment and human health.
Resolution 1815 (2011)1
Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe
1. The Parliamentary Assembly has repeatedly stressed the importance of states’ commitment to preserving the environment and environmental health, as set out in many charters, conventions, declarations and protocols since the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment and the Stockholm Declaration (Stockholm, 1972). The Assembly refers to its past work in this field, namely Recommendation 1863 (2009) on environment and health, Recommendation 1947 (2010) on noise and light pollution, and more generally, Recommendation 1885 (2009) on drafting an additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to a healthy environment and Recommendation 1430 (1999) on access to information, public participation in environmental decision-making and access to justice – implementation of the Aarhus Convention.
2. The potential health effects of the very low frequency of electromagnetic fields surrounding power lines and electrical devices are the subject of ongoing research and a significant amount of public debate. According to the World Health Organisation, electromagnetic fields of all frequencies represent one of the most common and fastest growing environmental influences, about which anxiety and speculation are spreading. All populations are now exposed to varying degrees of to electromagnetic fields, the levels of which will continue to increase as technology advances.
3. Mobile telephony has become commonplace around the world. This wireless technology relies upon an extensive network of fixed antennas, or base stations, relaying information with radio frequency signals. Over 1.4 million base stations exist worldwide and the number is increasing significantly with the introduction of third generation technology. Other wireless networks that allow high-speed internet access and services, such as wireless local area networks, are also increasingly common in homes, offices and many public areas (airports, schools, residential and urban areas). As the number of base stations and local wireless networks increases, so does the radio frequency exposure of the population.
4. While electrical and electromagnetic fields in certain frequency bands have wholly beneficial effects which are applied in medicine, other non-ionising frequencies, be they sourced from extremely low frequencies, power lines or certain high frequency waves used in the fields of radar, telecommunications and mobile telephony, appear to have more or less potentially harmful, non-thermal, biological effects on plants, insects and animals as well as the human body even when exposed to levels that are below the official threshold values.
5. As regards standards or threshold values for emissions of electromagnetic fields of all types and frequencies, the Assembly recommends that the ALARA or “as low as reasonably achievable” principle is applied, covering both the so-called thermal effects and the athermic or biological effects of electromagnetic emissions or radiation. Moreover, the precautionary principle should be applicable when scientific evaluation does not allow the risk to be determined with sufficient certainty, especially given the context of growing exposure of the population, including particularly vulnerable groups such as young people and children, which could lead to extremely high human and economic costs of inaction if early warnings are neglected.
6. The Assembly regrets that, despite calls for the respect of the precautionary principle and despite all the recommendations, declarations and a number of statutory and legislative advances, there is still a lack of reaction to known or emerging environmental and health risks and virtually systematic delays in adopting and implementing effective preventive measures. Waiting for high levels of scientific and clinical proof before taking action to prevent well-known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs, as was the case with asbestos, leaded petrol and tobacco.
7. Moreover, the Assembly notes that the problem of electromagnetic fields or waves and the potential consequences for the environment and health has clear parallels with other current issues, such as the licensing of medication, chemicals, pesticides, heavy metals or genetically modified organisms. It therefore highlights that the issue of independence and credibility of scientific expertise is crucial to accomplish a transparent and balanced assessment of potential negative impacts on the environment and human health.
8. In light of the above considerations, the Assembly recommends that the member states of the Council of Europe:
8.1. in general terms:
8.1.1. take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people who seem to be most at risk from head tumours;
8.1.2. reconsider the scientific basis for the present electromagnetic fields exposure standards set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection, which have serious limitations and apply “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) principles, covering both thermal effects and the athermic or biological effects of electromagnetic emissions or radiation;
8.1.3. put in place information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of potentially harmful long-term biological effects on the environment and on human health, especially targeting children, teenagers and young people of reproductive age;
8.1.4. pay particular attention to “electrosensitive” persons suffering from a syndrome of intolerance to electromagnetic fields and introduce special measures to protect them, including the creation of wave-free areas not covered by the wireless network;
8.1.5. in order to reduce costs, save energy, and protect the environment and human health, step up research on new types of antennas and mobile phone and DECT-type devices, and encourage research to develop telecommunication based on other technologies which are just as efficient but have less negative effects on the environment and health;
8.2. concerning the private use of mobile phones, DECT phones, WiFi, WLAN and WIMAX for computers and other wireless devices such as baby phones:
8.2.1. set preventive thresholds for levels of long-term exposure to microwaves in all indoor areas, in accordance with the precautionary principle, not exceeding 0.6 volts per metre, and in the medium term to reduce it to 0.2 volts per metre;
8.2.2. undertake appropriate risk-assessment procedures for all new types of device prior to licensing;
8.2.3. introduce clear labelling indicating the presence of microwaves or electromagnetic fields, the transmitting power or the specific absorption rate (SAR) of the device and any health risks connected with its use;
8.2.4. raise awareness on potential health risks of DECT-type wireless telephones, baby monitors and other domestic appliances which emit continuous pulse waves, if all electrical equipment is left permanently on standby, and recommend the use of wired, fixed telephones at home or, failing that, models which do not permanently emit pulse waves;
8.3. concerning the protection of children:
8.3.1. develop within different ministries (education, environment and health) targeted information campaigns aimed at teachers, parents and children to alert them to the specific risks of early, ill-considered and prolonged use of mobiles and other devices emitting microwaves;
8.3.2. for children in general, and particularly in schools and classrooms, give preference to wired Internet connections, and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises;
8.4. concerning the planning of electric power lines and relay antenna base stations:
8.4.1. introduce town planning measures to keep high-voltage power lines and other electric installations at a safe distance from dwellings;
8.4.2. apply strict safety standards for sound electric systems in new dwellings;
8.4.3. reduce threshold values for relay antennas in accordance with the ALARA principle and install systems for comprehensive and continuous monitoring of all antennas;
8.4.4. determine the sites of any new GSM, UMTS, WiFi or WIMAX antennas not solely according to the operators’ interests but in consultation with local and regional government officials, local residents and associations of concerned citizens;
8.5. concerning risk assessment and precautions:
8.5.1. make risk assessment more prevention oriented;
8.5.2. improve risk-assessment standards and quality by creating a standard risk scale, making the indication of the risk level mandatory, commissioning several risk hypotheses and considering compatibility with real life conditions;
8.5.3. pay heed to and protect “early warning” scientists;
8.5.4. formulate a human rights oriented definition of the precautionary and ALARA principles;
8.5.5. increase public funding of independent research, inter alia through grants from industry and taxation of products which are the subject of public research studies to evaluate health risks;
8.5.6. create independent commissions for the allocation of public funds;
8.5.7. make the transparency of lobby groups mandatory;
8.5.8. promote pluralist and contradictory debates between all stakeholders, including civil society (Aarhus Convention).
1 Text adopted by the Standing Committee, acting on behalf of the Assembly, on 27 May 2011 (see Doc. 12608, report of the Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs, rapporteur: Mr Huss).
by Howard Glasser
Good Morning Mr. Peevey. George Orwell had you and the industry you purport to regulate beat by 62 years. His book Nineteen Eighty-Four was published in 1949. If you haven’t read it, you really should. If you read it in high school or college, you may want to pick it up and read it again. It told of the future you are creating for yourself and us, your wife, your children and their children. You are leaving behind a legacy of terror Mr. Peevey.
The decisions you’re making now are probably the most crucial decisions you’ve ever made when it comes to how they will affect the lives of not only this generation, but the lives of generations to come. Albert Einstein said “It has become appalling obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” Such is the case here and I’d like you to take a hard look at that irrespective of the expectations of an industry to which you’ve become Godfather.
Besides being President of the CPUC, you’re a husband and father of three children and a grandfather and I’m sure that means a lot to you. I’m not prying but I am curious to learn a little about the man behind the desk.
I’m speaking to Michael Peevey the father and Grandpa. I’d like you to consider what kind of world you’re leaving behind for those you love. It’s hard to believe that in your heart of hearts given what you know and the facts that surround you, that you would commit your loved ones and the good people of California, indeed the fine people of this country to a faulted technology fraught with hazards.
According to medical reports such as the physician’s peer review of the California Council on Science and Technology on the health impacts of Smart Meters, these devices have been found to cause brain tumors, tinnitus, acoustic neuromas, childhood leukemia, neurodegenerative diseases, DNA damage and cognitive impairment. Smart Meter radiation slows motor skills, reduces learning ability, heats body tissue, lowers the immune system and does damage to the blood-brain barrier that prevents toxins from entering the brain. Even if only half of this were true, what kind of a Grandpa would protect an industry that shows such little regard for public health and safety?
At the CPUC meeting March 24th, PG&E and their attorneys took over 75 pages to say Show Me the Money. Oh they said it in legalize, the language of champions but let’s be completely honest Mr. Peevey. It’s about the money. Money is driving this; the agenda, this rollout, this rush to deploy. This skullduggery. It’s about money and greed and power.
Not green power but the power that’s wielded over a citizenry stripped of its rights and that you would see buried to meet deadlines and increase corporate profits while leaving us in the rubble of PG&E’s twisted machinations. It’s about how our money finds its way in to a utility company’s pockets which should come as no surprise to anyone because what isn’t about money these days whether it’s lobbying money or laundered money or campaign funding or pork barrels or bailouts? It is and always has been about the money.
It’s hard to believe that you would defend an industry that pretends to be green but is green only as in the color of money. Is there anything that you, the Smart Grid Industry, the CPUC and PG&E would NOT do for money Mr. Peevey?
Any good salesman or politician can tell you that if you want to sell something, give it a good name like Smart and make it the “green” thing to do. Don’t get me wrong. I’m as environmentally conscious as the next one but the Smart Grid movement is not about going green or conserving energy or reducing greenhouse gas emissions or saving Polar Bears. It’s about raising rates, increasing profits and selling the data it collects. The utility companies aren’t doing this for your health or for the environment.
We hear a lot of talk these days about the need for transparency as if it’s so hard to see through what’s going on so I’ll just come right to the bottom line. Mr. Peevey this is your chance of a lifetime if you take it to be a real hero for your children and their children, for California and for America. You will either be remembered as the man who set fire to our freedom and watched it burn or who ran in to the burning building and carried us out.
In a recent Federal Communications Commission (FCC) letter to Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, Julias Knapp, the FCC Chief of Office of Engineering and Technology, responds to an inquiry from the EMF Safety Network. The letter downplays the need for FCC oversight and regulation of their own installation RF safety conditions stating, “The grants of equipment authorization routinely list the four conditions cited by EMF [Safety Network] for the broad class of transmitters that include most Smart Meters….adherence to those conditions is not necessarily required for Smart Meters to achieve compliance with our RF exposure guidelines….the utility is responsible for ensuring compliance with any installation conditions listed on the grant of equipment authorization .”
In addition the FCC falsely claims, “the devices normally transmit for less than one second a few times a day and consumers are normally tens of feet or more from the meter face…”
See the following video about Smart Meter radiation. Listen to the clicks to see how often the meters are transmitting, and compare that to the FCC claims.
The California Council on Science and Technology (CCST)Health Impacts of Radio Frequency From Smart Meters final report was released on March 31, 2011. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) comments challenged the CCST, stating, “CDPH suggests further review of the literature on non-thermal effects, which is complicated and controversial, but does not support a claim of no non-thermal health effects from radio frequency electromagnetic fields.”
CDPH also provided the following links to documents regarding the controversy over Smart Meter (radio frequency radiation-RF) safety:
- Correspondence Provided by Rick Kreutzer, California Department of Health
Rick Kreutzer, California Department of Public Health (March 10, 2011)
- Mixed Signals About Cellphones’ Health Risks Hang Up Research
The Chronicle (September 26, 2010)
- Summary of the Literature: What do we Know About Cell Phones and Health?
(July 20, 2010)
- Brain Tumor Risk in Relation to Mobile Telephone Use: Results of the INTERPHONE International Case – Control Study
Oxford University Press (March 8, 2010)
- Mobile Phones and Health
U.K. Department of Health
- Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Towards Realism and Precaution with EMF?
David Gee, European Environment Agency, (January 30, 2009)
- Statement of Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) Concerning Mobile Phones and Health
Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority – STUK (January 7, 2009)
- Fact Sheet: Children and Safe Cell Phone Use
Toronto Public Health (July 2008)
- Children and Mobile phones: The Health of the Following Generations in Danger
Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (April 14, 2008)
- AFSSE Statement on Mobile Phones and Health
French Environmental Health and Safety Agency – AFSSE (April 16, 2003)
In addition to the following three studies, CDPH sent the following 3 study references to the CCST:
Electromagnetic Fields and DNA Damage: Phillips, J.L.; Singh, N.P.; Lai, H.;
Pathophysiology 16(2009) 79-88
Electromagnetic Fields and the Induction of DNA Strand Breaks: Ruiz-
Gomez, M.J.; Martinez-Morillo, M.; Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine
Radiofrequency and Extremely Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Effects
on the Blood-Brain Barrier: Nittby, H.; Grafstrom, G.; Eberhardt, J.L.;
Malmgren, L.; Brun, A.; Persson, B.R.R.; Salford, L.; Electromagnetic
Biology and Medicine 27:103-126, 2008
Other Comments to CCST Smart Meter Study http://www.ccst.us/projects/smart2/