Category: Take Action!

Is the public appropriately protected by the FCC RF exposure guidelines?

Last minute reminder:  FCC Comments due on Tuesday!

FCCThe Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is seeking comments on whether its radiofrequency radiation (RF, wireless) exposure guidelines should be “more restrictive, less restrictive or remain the same”.

These comments are due Tuesday September 3.

The FCC request for public comments is in part a response to the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) who called for a current review.

The FCC has not updated its RF exposure guidelines since 1996. Meanwhile there has been an explosion of wireless devices in homes across America, and forced deployment (cell towers, smart meters) of RF radiation on the general population.

The FCC exposure guidelines are based on thermal harm from 5 and 30 minute RF exposure. The wireless industry routinely uses the FCC exposure guidelines as proof of safety.

A stated goal of the FCC in requesting public comments includes “…the Commission’s intent is to appropriately protect the public without imposing an undue burden on the industry…”

What do you think?  Is the public appropriately protected by the FCC exposure guidelines?

The last day to post Comments is Tuesday September 3, 2013. Comments for this proceeding are closed.  Read formal Comments in docket 13-84 filed by EMF Safety Network

Dr. Ronald Powell: “Smart Meters are a community concern”

Dr. Ronald M Powell, PhD in applied physics from Harvard wrote:  Biological Effects from RF Radiation at Low-Intensity Exposure, based on the BioInitiative 2012 Report, and the Implications for Smart Meters and Smart Appliances

This is an important document to read and to bring to policy makers.

Dr. Powell’s Biological Effects Chart was produced from a review of the medical research literature on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields (BioInitiative.org). He concludes the following five points:

  1.  The current FCC Maximum Permitted Exposure (MPE) limits are so high that they provide no protection for the public from the biological effects found in any of the 67 studies.
  2. New biologically based RF exposure limits proposed in the BioInitiative 2012 Report are 1 million times lower than current FCC limits and would protect against the biological effects found in nearly all of the 67 studies.
  3. A single Smart Meter on a home can produce RF exposure levels that caused the biological effects found in either most or many of the 67 studies, depending on the distance from the Smart Meter.
  4. A single Smart Appliance in the home can produce RF exposure levels that caused the biological effects found in nearly half or fewer of the 67 studies, depending on the distance from the Smart Appliance. Multiple Smart Appliances in a home multiply the total exposure.
  5. A single Smart Meter on a nearest neighbor’s home can produce RF exposure levels that caused the biological effects found in many of the 67 studies. A given home may have one to eight nearest neighbors, each with a Smart Meter, multiplying the total exposure in the given home.

“Smart Meters are a community concern, not just an individual concern.”-Ronald Powell, PhD Applied Physics

The section on neighbors meters, and how smart meters are a community concern is especially relevant as policy makers decide how to proceed with solutions.  Here’s an excerpt of his paper:

“A Single Smart Meter on a Neighbor’s Home Can Produce RF Power Density Levels Shown to Cause Biological Effects

For some locations in a given home, the distance to a neighbor’s Smart Meter may be less than the distance to the resident’s own Smart Meter. Thus, a neighbor’s Smart Meter may be the principal source of radiation for some locations in the given home. The Biological Effects Chart shows that a single Smart Meter can produce RF power densities found to cause biological effects even at distances greater than 20 meters, and certainly up to 100 meters. And the number of neighbors within that range can be large. A given single-­‐family home in a residential community may have one to eight nearest neighbors, and even more next nearest neighbors, all within 100 meters (328 feet) of a given home, and each with a Smart Meter.

The problem of exposure from the neighbors’ Smart Meters becomes more serious as the distances between adjacent homes, and thus the distances between adjacent Smart Meters, get smaller. So, generally speaking, residents of townhouses will receive more radiation from their neighbors’ Smart Meters than residents of single-­‐family homes. And residents of apartments will receive even more radiation from their neighbors’ Smart Meters, depending on the location of the Smart Meters in the apartment buildings.

So Smart Meters are a community concern, not just an individual concern. To resolve the problems of RF exposure for a given home, it will be necessary to address all of the Smart Meters near that home. Smart Appliances, too, contribute to this concern. While, individually, they have a lower RF power output than a Smart Meter, the Smart Appliances of neighbors can also increase the RF exposure in the given home.

Fortunately, some states have offered an individual OPT OUT from the installation of a Smart Meter. While such an OPT OUT is very helpful, and is definitely the vital first step, the data on biological effects discussed here suggest the limitations of such an OPT OUT in resolving the problem of excess radiation from Smart Meters. There is no substitute for a roll back of all Smart Meters at the community level, or higher.”

“There is no substitute for a roll back of all Smart Meters at the community level, or higher.”-Ronald Powell, PhD Applied Physics

Wireless Kills!

PastedGraphic-1-9Utility smart meters, wi-fi, cell and cordless phones, and other common devices emit wireless radiation.  The World Health Organization has classified wireless radiation as a 2B carcinogen, same as DDT and lead, based on studies linking wireless to brain tumors.

Wireless can also cause headaches, tinnitus, anxiety, insomnia, cognitive and heart problems, and more. Children are especially at risk.

The BioInitiative Report is a compilation of evidence by international doctors and scientists who evaluated thousands of studies.  They warn about cancer and other health risks from wireless technology and recognize children are especially at risk, because their brains absorb more radiation than adults.

Click on the following links for more reasons to take precautions to protect yourself and your family.

If you  have developed symptoms of electrical sensitivity (ES) learn how to reduce your overall exposure.  See videos and learn more about ES.

The “wireless kills” card can be downloaded and printed out. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Wireless-kills.pdf

Thanks to Zavier Cabarga for logo and card design.

Class action lawsuit filed against BC Hydro smart meters

With the support and representation of the Citizens for Safe Technology (CST) Society & the Coalition to Stop Smart Meters, a class action has been brought against BC Hydro by Salt Spring Island resident, Nomi Davis.

The action was commenced on July 25, 2013, through the filing of a Notice of Civil Claim with the B.C. Supreme Court registry in Vancouver.  Smart Meter Class Action Filed

David M. Aaron, counsel for the Plaintiff stated, “The lawsuit asserts that the home is a private domain where free choice and autonomy rule. It claims a right of control over environmental exposures generated from one’s own domestic dwelling; and it alleges that BC Hydro has unlawfully leveraged its monopoly powers to violate that right by coercively and deceptively imposing a smart meter on the Plaintiff and other members of the Class.”

Steve Satow, CST advisory board member said, “If BC Hydro has forced a smart meter on you, threatened to cut off your power or refused to provide you with power unless you accepted a smart meter, then you may fit within the Class of persons on behalf of whom this claim is brought.”

The lawsuit seeks relief, including an order that BC Hydro remove unwanted smart meters as well as a permanent injunction restraining BC Hydro from exacting payment in exchange for an opt out.

Sharon Noble, CST Director commented, “Freedom to control the possible carcinogens emitted from one’s own home is not a luxury, it is a right.  We will not stand by and let a government authority extort a payment in exchange for the preservation of our rights.

 “We want free choice,  free of charge – and we want it now.” -Sharon Noble, CST Director

In April 2013 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer released a detailed report explaining its designation of smart meter and other radiofrequency emissions as a possible human cancer agent.

Nomi Davis is a Salt Spring Island yoga teacher on whom a smart meter was imposed in a deceptive and coercive fashion against the resistance of Davis and her supporters.

B.C. Hydro will have 21 days (from being served) to file its defence pleading (Response to Civil Claim) after which the Plaintiff will seek to have the action certified under the Class Proceedings Act.

Is Wi-Fi safe?

This is an excellent introduction to wi-fi radiation in schools, the science, government response, and how the radiation compares to ambient background and cell tower levels.

“Convenience is not an acceptable reason to risk the health and safety of children.” Learn more about wi-fi in schools: WiFi in Schools.com Learn more about the science:  BioInitiative.org