Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Havas Report on Smart Meters submitted to CCST / Letter to the Editor / Smart Grid could be harmful to your health / Radiation and Biofields /

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News 

19 January 2011

Report to CCST on Smart Meters

In October 2010, I was invited to submit a report to CCST on Smart Meters as part of a "Technical Response Team."  The report I submitted is attached or can be found at: 

My report does not support the overall conclusions in the CCST document that appeared on the CCST website in January 2011.  http://www.ccst.us/news/2011/20110111smart.php  

I was informed that the none of the submissions was going to be appended to the final document, nor was any going to be made available.  It would be useful to know how many of the other submissions support the final conclusions and recommendations of CCST.


Letter to the Editor


Dear Mr. Flood,
Please accept the following as an editorial piece for the Free Press:
Communities worldwide are confronting the same issues that residents of Wildwood are facing: proliferation of cell towers (antennae). I would like to tell you my story about antennae on Triangle Mountain in Victoria.
Like most of you, until 6 years ago if someone had told me that cell antennae emit radiation that is dangerous, I wouldn't have believed it. But no longer. In 2002 my husband and I found a fabulous lot on top of this "mountain" overlooking the city and the Strait. There were 2 towers with 3 FM antennae about 100 meters away. Before buying it I asked Health Canada if there were any health concerns about living near these things and was assured there were none. BC's Health Department gave me the same assurance, so we bought and built a home there.
Now, six years later, I'm a believer.
Health Canada's Dr. McNamee assured me that Safety Code 6 (SC6) which sets the levels of radiation to which we can be exposed, is one of the world's best. Not so! In fact, it is one of the worst in the developed world. Many countries, even Russia and China, have limits 99% lower than ours. (www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/intguidance.asp)
He told me that SC6 applies to all types of radiation, both thermal (like x-rays that heat) and non-thermal (like cell, FM and WiFi). Not so! SC6 duplicates those established by international agencies (ICNIRP and WHO) providing thermal, not non-thermal, guidelines set by the telecommunications industry, not by independent scientists. Dr. Don Maisch exposed this as part of his PhD thesis. (www.emfacts.com/papers/who_conflict/pdf)
Health Canada told me there was no scientific evidence of harm from non-thermal radiation like that from cell antennae. Not so! There are 1000s of studies going back decades when the US military discovered that this radiation could be used as weapons. A former US military scientist has released previously classified documents to Dr. Magda Havas. (www.magdahavas.com)
In March 1999 the Royal Society released "A Review of the Potential Health Risks of Radiofrequency Fields from Wireless Telecommunication Devices", commissioned by Health Canada. The review acknowledged that SC6 is inadequate for non-thermal protection. It said that studies prove this type of radiation causes biological effects such as blood brain barrier leakage, cell proliferation, and DNA damage.
As Dr. Olle Johansson of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, warned in April 2010 at the HESA Parliamentary hearings in Ottawa, our bodies are exposed to many billions of times the radiation that occurs naturally, levels to which humans were not exposed until just the last 20 years or so.
Major insurance companies will not cover risks associated with non-thermal radiation from wireless devices like antennae. They anticipate being hit with claims as soon as people become aware that many of their health problems are due to prolonged exposure. (www.lloyds.com/the-market/tasks-and-resources/research/exposure-management/emerging-risks/emerging-risks-reports)
But why would Health Canada mislead us about this? And why have some members of the Royal Society ignored the findings of their own 1999 Report? I did the research and discovered why. Just read my Petition 255 on the Auditor General of Canada's website. (www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/pet_255_e_31626.html). The documented evidence can be summarized simply: many of the scientists in and affiliated with Health Canada have become associated with the industry and are no longer unbiased. Just as with asbestos, lead and tobacco, corporations' money is influencing our health.
Since 2002, Industry Canada has allowed more than 40 more antennae to be installed near my home on Triangle Mountain, mostly cellular ones. No notification is required, even though we have a strong Consultation Policy because, according to Industry Canada's policies, no notice is required if an antenna is put on any existing structure: a tower, church, school, apt. building, etc. We have no right to complain because Industry Canada is following Health Canada's guidelines. A most convenient partnership!
Many of my neighbours are sick with cancers and neurological problems. Parents are especially concerned because children are most vulnerable. Some people have moved but, as more people learn about the dangers of living near antennae, homes are hard to sell. Also, as more cell transmitters are being erected it is becoming virtually impossible to avoid living near them.
We can get no help from provincial health authorities because Health Canada continues to assure them there is no evidence of harm so long as SC6 is followed. Unfortunately, as the documented evidence shows, Health Canada is treating this wireless revolution the same way it treated tobacco.
Do you own research.
Sharon Noble
Victoria, BC V9C 3V5


Kniazev: Smart Grid could be harmful to your health

The main problem with the system is that it is going to saturate the entire state in electromagnetic radiation. Not only will your meter now emit radiation, ...





Warren Brodey M.D. Blog on Radiation and Biofields

By Warren Brodey M.D.

Dodge, CH. 1969. Clinical and Hygienic Aspects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: A Review of the Soviet and Eastern European Literature. Biological Effects and Health Implications of Microwave Radiation, Symposium Proceedings, ...





Radiation injuries

By kelly
The energy of electromagnetic radiation is a direct function of its frequency. The high energy, high frequency waves that can penetrate solids to various depths cause damage by separating molecules into electrically charged pieces, ..... The fact sheets cover such topics as basic radiation facts, acute radiation sickness (ARS), dirty bombs, effects of radiation on health, possible effects of radiation on unborn children, and protective measures in the case of a nuclear ...



To sign up for WEEP News: newssignup@weepinitiative.org  (provide name and e-mail address)

W.E.E.P. – The Canadian initiative to stop Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution