Public Health – Page 3 – EMF Safety Network

Smart Meters Affect the Human Heart

by Warren Woodward, Sedona, Arizona ~ May 31, 2017

Some people weren’t satisfied that my last video was proof enough that “smart” meters affect the human heart. They want to see me get tortured repeatedly, and they want to see others get tortured.

According to one skeptic, I may have had a condition that just happened to coincide with the “smart” meter transmission. How did he know my secret? I must confess I do have a condition. It’s called being healthy, and what the video showed is what happens when a healthy heart gets zapped by a “smart” meter.

Part II of EKG Proof That “Smart” Meters Affect the Human Heart shows that the results of the first video are repeatable. There’s another victim in the video too, so it should be obvious to all that “smart” meters affect everyone. If it’s not obvious to you then hook yourself up to an EKG and hang out near a “smart” meter; I’ve done it enough.

Some people were also concerned that the “smart” meter may have interfered with the EKG device itself and not the human heart. So we have a segment showing what happens when the “smart” meter transmits with the EKG running but with no human hooked up to it. Spoiler alert: nothing happens!

Can we get “smart” meters removed now, or do I have to show someone getting a heart attack?

Oppose SB-649 “small cells” in California

July 15, 2017 update to this post is here: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/sb-649-is-a-shameless-gift-to-the-telecom-industry/

Would you want to have these all over your town, in your neighborhood, maybe even in front of your house?

SB-649 is a current California Senate bill introduced by Senator Hueso. EMF Safety Network opposes this bill because it will fast track wireless radiation antenna deployments in our neighborhoods and communities, and thwart public participation.

The League of California Cities opposes SB-649. They describe it stating, “This proposal unnecessarily and unconstitutionally strips local authority over public property and shuts out public input and local discretion by eliminating consideration of the aesthetic and environmental impacts of “small cells.”

How to oppose SB-649 “Wireless telecommunications facilities”

Please submit your comments by April 3rd!

1. Go to http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB649

2. Scroll down and click on “Comments to Author”

3. If you have not registered you will need to do so.

4. After you register click the circle “oppose” and send your comments (2000 characters) to the author by March 28. If you are representing a group please sign as such. Before you click submit, copy your comments into a separate email.

5. Send the same comments to your State Senator which you can find here: Type in your address and city. http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/

EMF Safety Network and Ecological Options Network sent the following letter opposing SB-649.

Suggested comments: If you need help with what to say you can use any or all of these comments which are adapted in part from the California League of Cities form letter, and our letter.

Dear Senator Hueso,

I respectfully oppose SB-649. This proposal unnecessarily and unconstitutionally strips local authority over public property and shuts out public input and local discretion by eliminating consideration of the aesthetic and environmental impacts of “small cells.”

International scientists and doctors advise reducing wireless radiation exposure to protect public and environmental health.

Wireless disrupts cellular communication, damages immune and nervous systems, desynchronizes brain and heart rhythms, and causes headaches, sleep problems, tinnitus, anxiety and a host of other health problems.

5G millimeter wave technology is scientifically shown to affect humans, penetrating the skin and affecting biological systems

There is no substantial evidence to support SB649’s determination that the deployment fits the CEQA exemption. There is substantial evidence in support of a fair argument that the project may create environmental impacts.

The National Toxicology Program published a 25 million dollar study which is one of the largest and most comprehensive studies on cell phone radiation and cancer. In the study the rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed two types of cancers, glioma, a brain tumor, and schwannoma, a tumor in the heart.

This bill strips local government of the authority to protect the quality of life of their residents, and to protect public property and the public right-of-way from relatively unconstrained access by small cells.

Neither the CPUC, nor the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) can be relied on to serve the public interest because they are both regulatory captured agencies.

SB 649 goes too far by requiring local governments to approve “small cells” in all land use zones, including residential zones, through a ministerial permit, thereby shutting the public out of decisions that could affect the aesthetics of their community and the quality of their environment.

Thank you!

[your name]

“I’m shouting, but no-one is listening!” How to talk to people about wireless radiation.

Rachel Gaunt has an extensive 20 year background in advertising, marketing and social activism. Rachel has written this article, “I’m shouting, but no-one is listening! How to talk to people about wireless radiation so they can hear…and care” to help EMF activists.

She writes, “Why is it that our earnest explanations about the dangers of wireless radiation so often fall on deaf ears? Why in the face of so much science are people not rushing to protect themselves?

I have long been an observer of humans and how they behave, and have spent a long time puzzling the resistance and denial that conversations about wireless radiation can generate. Recently, a meeting with behavior expert, Matthew Wilcox, author of The Business of Choice, helped to provide the final pieces of the puzzle.

When you look at the way humans make decisions, it turns out that there are three major factors working against us when it comes to shifting beliefs about wireless radiation.

Three factors working against us

First and foremost there is the “It will never happen to me,” response to anything bad that may happen to us in the future. This is especially true among young people.

“It will never happen to me. I am never going to die. It might happen to someone else but not to me.”…

Read Rachel Gaunt’s full article here: I’m shouting but no-one is listening!”

CA Department of Public Health sued for hiding cell phone radiation warnings

Dr. Joel Moskowitz, Director of UC Berkeley School of Public Health has sued the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) for failing to provide a tax payer funded study on cell phone radiation risks. The CDPH refused to comment on the case.

Attorney Claudia Polsky states this is “tax payer funded scientific research over a period of years resulted in a review of the scientific literature about cell phone risks and the production of a document that was supposed to reach the public informing people about how to reduce risks from cell phone use.”

Dr. Moskowitz was asked why the state is trying to suppress the document. He stated, “They [CDPH] claim that they are concerned that this would lead to chaos and confusion among the public. I suspect that they were afraid of the reaction of the telecommunications industry should they publish this document; in fact, they even argued that in their brief.”

UPDATE: In response to media pressure the CDPH pre-released the cell phone advisory to the SF Chronicle. Here it is: CDPH cell phone document April 2014

Fairfax Town Council letter to PG&E “Comply with our Ordinances”

Thank you to the Town of Fairfax CA who sent a letter to PG&E asking then to “cease the impending roll-out of SmartMeter installations in Fairfax.”

Fairfax writes, “By PG&E’s actions to proceed with the SmartMeter program in Fairfax, in essence, PG&E is effectively attempting to render the CPUC rehearing review process moot. Furthermore, by continuing forward on installations, PG&E will be in violation of the Town of Fairfax’s Ordinance and would therefore be potentially subject to Code Enforcement Violations.”

2-14-17 Fairfax letter to PGE – SmartMeter Installation

PG&E has threatened both Sebastopol and Fairfax with smart meter installations even though there are appeals pending at the California Public Utilities Commission, and both cities have laws banning smart meter installation. EMF Safety Network has been quoted in three newspapers recently.

Marin Independent Journal:

Santa Rosa Press Democrat:

Sonoma West Times and News:

We have asked the City of Sebastopol to enforce the ban on smart meters and they have not responded. However, Sebastopol Mayor Una Glass opened public comments at the last city council meeting with a statement referencing the Marin Independant Journal article,“that basically said that this council doesn’t care about smart meters anymore.” She affirmed Sebastopol still has an ordinance that is not repealed and she stated, “We are concerned with the health of our citizens.”

Film showing “Take Back Your Power” Jan. 12, 7pm at the Sebastopol Grange

Please join us on Thursday January 12, for a film showing of Take Back Your Power at the Sebastopol Grange at 7pm. Following the film we will have an expert panel discussion and Q&A. Click here for the flyer.

Starting in January, PG&E will be sending letters to Sebastopol and Fairfax customers forcing them to install a Smart Meter or pay opt-out fees to keep the safer analog. Both cities have banned smart meter installation, but PG&E is now ignoring their ordinances. Smart meter opt-out fees are being legally challenged, and appeals are pending.

The award winning and eye opening Take Back Your Power documentary investigates the Smart Meter program being deployed without informed consent. The film uncovers alarming issues about health, privacy, property rights, corporate fraud and the unprecedented vulnerability of the smart grid.

This public event is an opportunity to learn more about why our communities need to continue to push back against PG&E’s smart meters.

Tickets will be sold at the door, sliding scale $20-$10 and no one turned away for lack of funds. Sebastopol Grange is located at 6000 Sebastopol Ave.

Our Panel includes:

Michael Neuert is the owner and founder of “Neuert Electromagnetic Services”. He is an engineer, electrical contractor, and health enthusiast who has provided specialized EMF services for over 24 years. He holds a Bachelor of Science Degree In Engineering from the University of Wisconsin (1978) and a Masters Degree in Human Systems Psychology from Sonoma State University in California (1984). http://www.emfcenter.com

Wes Vaught: Wes Vaught has been a cranio-sacral therapist and instructor for 25 years. Prior to moving to Sebastopol from Minneapolis he was a licensed alcohol and chemical dependency counselor with graduate studies in clinical counseling for co-occurring addiction and mental health issues. Wes has done significant research in EMF sensitivity through personal experience and after encountering similar issues in his clients.

Sandi Maurer: Sandi is the director of the EMF Safety Network and California Public Utilities Commission intervenor on smart meter proceedings. Sandi has legally and publicly opposed PG&E’s smart meters since 2009.

Nerve disrupting frequencies radiating from “smart” meters

Warren Woodward: Everyone knows that wireless “smart” meters communicate via microwaves. What was unknown until now is that additional frequencies are transmitted in the 2 to 50 kilohertz range. Numerous studies have shown repeatedly that those very same frequencies disrupt the human nervous system. Indeed, “nerve block” is the phrase used in the studies to describe what occurs.

The studies are not controversial. In others words, there are no studies that show otherwise. Nerve block induced by frequencies in the 2 to 50 kilohertz range is an established fact. The studies that show this nerve block are all from reputable sources including the epitome of “establishment” science when it comes to electricity, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

So the demonstration you will see in the video is groundbreaking, or more accurately, “smart” meter breaking.

Unless they cease, desist, and bring down the wireless “smart” grid at once, “smart” meter manufacturers and the utilities that use them are going to be facing massive liability and personal injury lawsuits because, unlike the microwave radiation that anti-“smart” meter advocates have been calling attention to for years, there is no scientific dispute regarding the biological effects of 2 to 50 kilohertz frequencies.

Additionally, state utility regulators and public health departments will need to actually do their jobs which always used to include protecting the public and promoting public health and safety.

Lastly, the U.S. Department of Energy will have to bring an immediate halt to the promotion and subsidization of the wireless “smart” grid.

Every day of delay will bring greater liability for the aforementioned corporations and agencies and the individuals involved. It’s one thing to act in ignorance, quite another not to act once knowledge is received.

To everyone reading, send this video to your utilities, your state utility regulators, your state health departments, and to hungry lawyers everywhere. Links to studies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NTSejgsjTc

PG&E 2 Watt smart meters

PG&E now has on it’s website a description of a new type of smart meter that transmits up to 2 watts of radio frequency radiation. They call it a “meter connector.” Years ago activists warned there was a meter like this, some called it a “mother” or a “medusa” meter”, but PG&E didn’t admit to it. In June 2011 PG&E wrote “PG&E’s network design does not use a ‘mother’ meter concept; relay devices and access point collectors are pole-top devices.”

In November 2011, when the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) judge asked for technical details about smart meters, there was no mention of a smart meter that transmitted up to 2 watts. PG&E only reported using 1 watt meters. The table below is the technical description of the smart meters PG&E reported to the CPUC judge.
When did PG&E start using 2 watt meters on people’s homes? How would someone know if they had one? Do they look different?

This is from PG&E’s website: “If a standard SmartMeter™ is unable to connect to PG&E’s dedicated radio frequency (RF), a Meter-Connector is installed to act as both a SmartMeter™ and a cellular electric network access point (so it can collect information from neighboring non-communicating meters)… The Meter-Connector either transmits 1.25 watts or 2 watts depending on the speed of the cellular network in your area, compared to a standard SmartMeter that transmits 1 watt.”