Thursday, March 31, 2011

Smart meters and grids put public at risk / BBC recklessly endangers life / A Technology Detox / A Real Pain / Redesigned RRT website / EU Policy / Japan nuclear plant

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

30 March 2011

Please note - WEEP news will not be available for a few days.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Viewpoint - Smart meters and grids put public at risk

By Contributed Opinion - Gulf Islands Driftwood

Published: March 30, 2011 10:00 AM

By CHRIS ANDERSON

Why is our publicly owned utility allowed to dictate that we must accept a powerful source of continuous electromagnetic radiation — in the form of a so-called electrical "smart" meter — on every home and workplace?

The billion dollar — and rising — "smart grid" plan, developed and now being deployed in relative secrecy by BC Hydro, with no open public consultation, is to be part of an interconnected, continental and very vulnerable "smart" power grid. The problem lies in the intention to track power usage in — virtually — real time, via meters that transmit data via EM radiation that science shows is unsafe. There is a need for wide-scale improvements to the present semi-dysfunctional system. But Gulf Islanders for Safe Technology takes the position that improvements must not be introduced at the expense of public health and security.

Hydro takes the position that Health Canada's very lax and unprotective exposure limits are not being exceeded, so the new wireless system is "safe." Yet our widely discredited guidelines offer protection only from extremely high levels of exposure that cause body tissue heating. (Think microwave ovens.) But from much lower intensities — at "non-thermal" exposure levels — we're not protected by these irrelevant guidelines. And if we had realistic exposure limits based on how biology is affected, never would "smart meters" use radiation to exchange data. They would all be and should be hard wired.

At greatest risk from "smart grid" radiation — as is the pattern with any hazardous contaminant — are the young, the elderly, the immune-compromised, those who are pregnant and the growing population of those with electromagnetic or electrical sensitivity. Soon, if we allow Hydro to get away with this so-called "smart" experiment, we can never be free of electromagnetic contamination. All wiring systems will be linked with all other wiring systems throughout North America, as meter after "smart" meter shoots powerful periodic bursts of data-laden radiation to awaiting antennas. These then blanket the area with more radiation linking with the grid.

In addition to damage to public health, loss of privacy and risk to personal data security by "smart" grids, another great concern is the issue of cyber security. In Canada we have recently seen major intrusions by hackers based in China, of ultra secure federal departments such as finance and defence research. We're now in an age of cyber warfare where nothing is immune from intrusion. Iran has just threatened a possible "retaliatory cyber strike" against the North American power grid — a snap if it's all interconnected and "meshed."

"There's a general consensus amongst . . . most of us in the security business that smart meter technology has gotten way out in front of the security technology," says top cyber expert Mark Weatherford, chief security officer for Washington-based North American Electric Reliability Corp.

These new radiating "smart" meters are increasingly a cause of ill health, in other areas where they are deployed. The public has consistently never been consulted about being experimented on in this way, as companies rush for a share of the largest, most profitable economic bubble ever dreamed into being. "At stake: a global market worth $45 trillion." (N. Hodge: The Second Leg of Smart Grid Profits, November 2009).

Fortunately, the new "improved" Clark administration and new Energy Minister Rich Coleman have called for a review of this expensive wireless plan. Questionable insider dealings during the Campbell regime have also surfaced. The cost to B.C. taxpayers is huge. Anything this momentous, involving change on such a grand scale, must in a democratic society involve the public.

Rate hikes for electricity — to pay for "smart" technology — will make it difficult for many to keep the lights on, let alone to stay warm. Hydro admits to a whopping 50 per cent increase for the next three years. B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centres say it will be 10 per cent for 10 years! And what's so "smart" about that?

The writer heads the Gulf Islanders for Safe Technology group.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: info llrc info@llrc.org

Subject: Beta spike in California. BBC recklessly endangers life

From Radnet data https://cdx.epa.gov/SSL/cdx/EPA_Home.asp

It appears that there has been a sudden increase in beta radiation in California today (30th March 2011). We are not able to say what has caused it. We hope to do some analysis tomorrow, Thursday 31st, and see what Radnet data show then. See the LLRC site <http://www.llrc.org> for the graph. We bring you this information so people on the western seaboard of the Americas can take the elementary precaution of staying indoors.We hope this is a false alarm but it is prudent to assume it is not.

Earlier we posted that the BBC is recklessly endangering people by ridiculing people for taking Iodine tablets as a precaution against radioactive pollution. On Monday 28th March Material World - a regular Radio 4 science programme - featured Professor Robin Grimes, Director of the Centre of Nuclear Engineering at Imperial College, London.

He sneered at Californians for taking stable Iodine (the stable Iodine fills up the thyroid gland so it can't absorb Iodine 131). He added that it was not necessary even for people in Tokyo. He said: I believe people in California are buying Iodine tablets and things like that which is completely, completely crazy. However there will be people close to the [Fukushima] plant who should be taking that [Iodine] as a precaution and they are being told to do so; that's being dealt with in a sensible manner but [for] people in - say - as far away as Tokyo that would not be necessary at this point in time - not even close.

Mindful that after Chernobyl increased thyroid cancer was observed in Britain as well as Russia, LLRC's current advice is that people in Japan definitely ought to be taking stable Iodine; California is borderline (or it was borderline when we uploaded) In the UK it's probably unnecessary at present. However, as the UK Health Protection Agency agrees, there are no risks associated with Iodine tablets so long as the dose is not grossly exceeded. There is no argument against taking them as a precaution. Grimes' remarks can only be seen either as ignorant or as just one more attempt to play down the hazard of nuclear power.

US Attorney Stuart Smith of environmental and personal injury specialists Smith Stag <http://www.smithstag.com> told LLRC Grimes' advice would, if followed, increase risks with possibly fatal conseqences, especially for children. People would be justified in prosecuting him, his employers and the BBC for recklessly endangering life. Stuart Smith's law firm is a pioneer in the field of Technologically Enhanced Radioactive Materials and oilfield waste litigation.

The UK has no law of reckless endangerment but in USA and Scotland among other countries it is a criminal offence to put lives at risk through an action or by failing to act.

LLRC's Secretary Richard Bramhall said: BBC producers seem to have forgotten that they are required to balance the expression of opinions on controversial issues. On radiation and health the BBC is institutionally unbalanced, routinely allowing "experts" like Professor Grimes to claim that only 50 deaths are attributable to Chernobyl without reference to the countervailing evidence.

The "Horizon" documentary "Nuclear Nightmares" in 2006 was an outstanding example. My complaint eventually led the BBC Trust to rule "Nuclear Nightmares" was biased. I hope the threat of a class action in California or Japan will concentrate minds a bit.

The Material World broadcast is the first item on this listen again link

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00zm31w/Material_World_24_03_2011 ,

which is scheduled to be on the BBC web site until Friday.

LLRC supports the Nuclear Information and Resource Service Grassroots Platform for Nuclear Safety and Security

"><http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6195> .

It calls for the radiation risk model of the European Committee on Radiation Risk

"><http://www.euradcom.org>

to replace the International Commission on Radiological Protection - as LLRC has long recommended.

Go to

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6195 to sign up online or email nirsnet@nirs.org

Mast Sanity

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Technology Detox

http://www.fitnessgoop.com/2011/03/a-techology-detox-can-you-turn-off-your-gadgets-for-24-hours/

Dr Magda Havas
drmagdahavas@gmail.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Real Pain

http://www.canada.com/Sensitivity+wireless+frequencies+real+pain/4525150/story.html

In regards to A. Richards letter regarding wireless hydro meters, I want to state that I totally agree with his concern of making personal choices.

Several years ago I got wireless internet for my home. Eight months later my ankles and feet were so painful I could not walk more than a block. X-rays showed nothing wrong, so surgery was scheduled to fuse the bones in my feet.

All my life I had been lucky to have been a sound sleeper, but now I had insomnia for the first time in my life.

It was on the third night of not having slept, I decided to unplug everything in my house because I kept feeling constant rhythmic vibration pulses when I lay in bed or on my couch or on the floor. Actually after three nights without sleep I thought I was going mad. To my surprise, when I unplugged my wireless router, all vibration stopped.

When I phoned my internet provider, they didn't seem surprised and said that some people are more sensitive to Electromagnetic Frequencies (EMF). Researching this on the internet I found much information, including that EMF sensitivity is considered a disability in Sweden, and that employers must provide shielding for these persons.

I got rid of my wireless, installed shielded cables for my internet and am now sleeping soundly every night. My feet hardly hurt anymore and I have cancelled the surgery. I am getting my health back!

Take a look at these publications by Dr. Magda Havas, PhD,

http://www.scribd.com/doc/15005811/Open-Letter-to-Parents-Teachers-School-Boards-Regarding-WiFi-Networks-in-Schools

and

http://www.magdahavas.com/

and

http://www.magdahavas.org/

regarding wireless and EMF radiation concerns.

Wireless baby monitors should be a concern for parents. Maybe that's why the baby is crying?

Out of necessity I have a cell phone, but try not to carry it too close to my body or I turn it off when not in use.

We seem to have forgotten that in the 1950s X-rays were considered harmless, and those were considerably stronger than what we use today. In the 1950s in Germany, children's feet (including mine) were x-rayed in shoe stores for every pair they tried on to see if they fit.

The radiation could be measured outside the store.

Monika Krause

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The UK EM Radiation Research Trust (RRT) recently updated and redesigned the RRT website which includes a new online EHS survey and the Save the Males poster campaign.

The website also includes our new fundraising campaign document containing our aims and objectives. Take a look at the new design here, we hope you like it:

http://www.radiationresearch.org/

Also take a look at our new Facebook and please share with your friends, colleagues and family:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/EM-Radiation-Research-Trust/141400382553499

Kind Regards,

Eileen O'Connor
Director
EM Radiation Research Trust
http://www.radiationresearch.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://ec.europa.eu/health/electromagnetic_fields/policy/index_en.htm

Policy

Electric and electronic systems have become so pervasive that it is now difficult to imagine life without them. While they contribute to our quality of life in many ways, they also create electromagnetic fields (non-ionising radiation) which, when emitted at sufficient levels, may warm biological tissues (as they do in microwave ovens).

Electromagnetic fields have different frequencies - expressed in Hertz (Hz), or oscillations per second - suited to different uses, for example:

  • strong static fields (0 Hz) are used in medical MRI scanning
  • low frequencies (50 Hz) are used by the standard alternating electric current (AC) feeding our homes and offices
  • high frequencies are used by mobile phones (900 MHz).

Until about 20 years ago, the main manmade sources of electromagnetic fields were radio and television broadcasting stations and high voltage power lines. The rapid development of mobile telecommunications and other electronic appliances since the 1990's has substantially increased the number of sources and types of electromagnetic fields we are exposed to. This has raised concerns about their possible adverse health effects.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/30/3178011.htm?section=world

Japan nuclear plant boss hospitalised

By North Asia correspondent Mark Willacy, wires

Japan is now considering plans to drape special covers over the shattered nuclear reactor buildings at Fukushima. (TEPCO)

The president of Tokyo Electric Power, the company that runs Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant, has been admitted to hospital.

The strain of the crisis appears to have taken its toll on Masataka Shimizu, 66, who was hospitalised with high blood pressure and dizziness.

Mr Shimizu fell ill during the Fukushima nuclear crisis and took several days off from the joint taskforce set up by the company and the government.

He has not appeared in public for more than a fortnight.

As Japan works to contain the world's worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986, the level of radioactive iodine in the sea off the stricken nuclear plant has reached its highest reading yet - more than 3,300 times the legal limit.

The Japan government is now considering plans to drape shattered nuclear reactor buildings with special covers to limit radiation and pump contaminated water into a tanker.

The embattled nation is also inviting foreign experts to help stabilise the overheating Fukushima station.

The United States has lent Japan robots that can crawl through, film and clear rubble in the blast-hit reactor buildings which humans cannot enter because of high radiation.

And France, which relies on nuclear power for three-quarters of its domestic energy needs, was sending an expert team from Areva, its state-run reactor maker, to assist TEPCO.

An official with Japan's nuclear safety agency said it was time to think outside the box.

"We are in an unprecedented situation, so we need to think about different strategies beyond what we normally think about," the official said.

Japan must pump water into reactors to stop them from overheating, even as highly radioactive runoff leaks out, halting crucial repair work and threatening the environment.

Iodine-131 detected in Pacific Ocean near the plant surged to a new high of 3,355 times the legal limit, compared to the previous top level of 1,850 times the legal maximum taken days ago.

"The figures are rising further," nuclear safety agency spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama said.

"We need to find out as quickly as possible the cause and stop them from rising any higher."

Radioactive steam has also wafted into the air, contaminating regional farm and dairy produce, and last week led to elevated iodine levels in drinking water in Tokyo, 250 kilometres to the south west.

Japanese authorities have repeatedly stressed that none of the affected food products or water presents an immediate threat to human health, and that ocean currents will dilute radioactivity in the sea.

With crucial control room functions still disabled, experts are not sure what is happening inside the reactors, and some international experts have issued dire warnings that a meltdown may already be in progress.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Wi Fi Health Risk Advisory / The Precautionary Principle / Wi Fi in Long-Term Care Homes / workplace injury / St. Petersburg / Health concerns / School cell tower / Radiation Fall Out

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

30 March 2011

Wi Fi is illegal in schools

I have attached a file that is a Wi-Fi Health Risk Advisory. Wi Fi is illegal in schools as per Health Canada's Safety Code 6, they need to enforce it.

The attachment contains the reporting of Randy Ross and Tony Muc. The first page shows what they missed in their reporting on the issue.

Curtis Bennett

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Precautionary Principle

Dear All,

In case you have not yet seen it, I hereby want to strongly recommend reading one of our recent papers, Dämvik M, Johansson O, "Health risk assessment of electromagnetic fields: A conflict between the precautionary principle and environmental medicine methodology", Rev Environ Health 2010; 25: 325-333 (See attached paper).

(Abstract) The purpose of the precautionary principle is that legal requirements are to be made to safeguard against the possible health risks that have not yet been scientifically established. That a risk is not established cannot, therefore, be used as an excuse for not applying the principle. Yet, that rationale is exactly what is happening in the case of the possible health risks from exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF). The scientists, representing both the World Health Organization and the European Commission, do not have at all the precautionary principle in mind when they report on health risks. Their starting point is instead to determine whether new research findings have been scientifically established and thus cannot be the basis for an amendment to the existing exposure limits.

Uncertain indications of risk are ignored or played down. This approach is in conflict with European Union (EU) law, which requires that the degree of scientific uncertainty should be presented correctly. A thorough examination of the state of research shows many serious indications of possible health risks from exposure very far below existing limits for EMF.

Case law, for other types of exposure, also shows that the precautionary principle can be applied on the basis of weaker evidence than that. Our investigation shows that the precautionary principle is not being used for its intended purpose in relation to exposure to EMF. The reason for this position is that decision-makers are being misled by inaccurate risk assessments.

Best regards
Yours
Olle
(Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Dangers of using Wi Fi in Long-Term Care Homes

David McKeown, Medical Officer of Health (MOH),

In your letter of March 16, 2011 to my wife and co-advocate against the dangers of wireless, Lorraine Penner, after referral by Councillor Fletcher of the Board of Health, you state that wifi "is being installed so that LTCHS [Long-Term Care Homes and Services] could comply with strategies directed by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) related to the eHealth Ontario initiative." In consultation with a senior staff person at that Health Ministry, it was made clear to me that the final say for such installation is with the administration of LTCHS. There thus must be freedom to not comply.

In the same letter you mention assurance made to myself and my wife that the wifi "would be at least one hundred or more times below Health Canada's Code 6". It is presumed that your interest in such a figure regards the local "prudent avoidance" policy predating your arrival as MOH, of 100x less than Code 6. There thus is freedom for a municipal health department to advise and act independently.

You state that we "expressed deep concerns on behalf of residents at all long-term care homes regarding the Wi-Fi system". It is not clear whether you meant that such "concerns" were expressed at the May meeting, since we have had many communications past that date with LTCHS and others on topic. Regardless, "concerns" is an altogether inappropriate term. When bullous pemphigoid breaks out after wi-fi switch-on, and completely abates at shut-off, and it is known that such is an expected reaction in some people to artificial electromagnetic insult such as from wifi, it does not take much reasoning to arrive at the conclusion that wifi danger is not a mere "concern". Negative behavioural changes were also noted in one resident at Cummer Lodge starting while wifi was on, abating at switch-off. Already two such strongly evident reactions among the very few residents we could notice from regular visits there. How many years of study of public health is required to make the appropriate and obvious judgement?

You mention the OAHPP "independent review of the science". Did you take a moment to examine the gross inadequacy of that review, regardless of what the provincial CMOH ineptly says on its basis? You could be shown almost line-by-line sharp criticism of it.

You mention the federal Standing Committee (HESA). If you "followed the outcome", did you actually read or hear the testimony? It was devastating to the dangerous status quo even in the constrained conference circumstances, and regardless of the politicians' eventual lame & inept report response. Note that of all the witnesses assembled for the federal Dept. of Health status quo, but a single one was from HC itself, the rest industry-connected. In collaboration with two co-advocates from BC & Quebec, I was responsible for the invitation of HESA witnesses against the dangerous status quo. Are you aware what happened to our European whistleblower witnesses, just after their testimony to your Parliamentary Committee? Drs Johansson, Sasco & Panagopolous had their academic offices removed from them. Dr Goldsworthy had recently retired, so could not have his office removed, although it had been removed for similar truth-telling just prior to retirement. There is no doubt a concerted effort to squelch their brave and honest speaking out based on scientific study, as has happened to others in this sorry field. The youngest, and for that maybe most vulnerable, of that group is Panagopoulos, who further has had his transfer to a prestigious research facility blocked, and has had a learned paper refused at a publication where many times his oft-cited work has already appeared. While some people with some awareness of the dangers of latter-day wireless mania, such as at TPH and other such departments, collect six-figure incomes while not daring to act bravely for the sake of public health on these grave issues, others suffer for telling the truth, and for advocating based on non-industry-connected science. Our own family, for our vigourous advocacy facing this outrageous travesty, has thus far lost about a year's income in the dedicated effort already.

In a culture where money rules, what should perhaps sound the loudest alarm bells, but that insurance companies will not insure for physical harm caused by latter-day wireless mania? Who insures against bullous pemphigoid, behavioural changes and other such harm from the eHealth-compliant wifi at LTCHS, as well as other institutional wifi, in schools, libraries, etc., not to mention cell phone towers on City property & elsewhere broadcasting even at max. 100x less than HC Danger Code 6?

You refer to the lame HESA report -- censored of much submitted material, wouldn't you know, some of which can be provided to your Dept. -- and to a "current lack of conclusive evidence linking low level RF exposures causally to the array of symptoms reported by those with electromagnetic sensitivity". "Sensitivity", while ubiquitous, is a misleading term. Biological beings are exquisitely electromagnetic, and have been shown to react to synthetic "non-ionizing" radiation at exposures billions of times lower than even TPH's prudent avoidance levels. Everyone's bodies can be assumed to "sense" the onslaught in some way; it is a question of whether one reacts, or knows to make the connexion between some symptom and the electomagnetic insult. In some people such as myself, milder sufferer, I can often quickly tell, based on sensations about my forehead and scalp, when in proximity to wifi, from which I know to flee, such as at the Toronto Central Reference Library, which in '09 resulted in an email exchange of some length in which an effort to individually accommodate me was offered. This is a tactic similar to what is occurring at Cummer Lodge, where a knowledgeable dissenting family is isolated and dealt with separately, so as not to perturb a broader plan, doubtless ultimately in the main pandering to unseen investors caring really only for the health of their investments or pet schemes. Adequate wired substitutes for this eHealth wifi for nurses exist, as they do for schools, libraries, etc.

Further, the HESA report did not discuss, as you say, but merely mentioned HC's position about lack of causality. This is truly bizarre, as at both those very April meetings, for glaring example, BQ HESA MP Serge Cardin attested to his own electrosensitivity!! In our private meeting with another HESA MP, her own such sensitivity was spoken of. At that May meeting of which you write in your letter, we were told that two of your senior TPH staff keep their own occupationally required cell phones off. What is going on? How do you think all this looks?

You seem in the letter to offer dosimetry for the Cummer Lodge situation. But when Code 6 is irrelevant and unprotective especially regarding long-term exposures, as is even TPH's 100x less, what is the use of taking measurements? (A further irony is that the section of the facility where my wife's mother resides, is a relatively very low radiation zone for Toronto, as determined by own own dosimetry, this refuge to be taken away by offending wifi emitters put elsewhere in the building.) Much more "sensible" would be for your Dept. to closely monitor any and all changes to staff and residents' health at such facilities before and after - of course, this is unethical, non-consensual, uninformed human experimentation, but in the crazy context, it can appear "sensible". If you would find that sickness increased, spaces opened up more quickly as the elderly died off faster, staff felt impaired; even were all that to present itself, based on current nonsensical behaviour by "authorities", since no "mechanism" for harm has been found fully satisfactory to the orthodox defenders of the status quo, there might be no conclusions drawn about the wifi, it would be formally "inconclusive". (Dr Panagopoulos has recently prepared in a textbook chapter what appears now to be the best description to date of mechanism for harm at the cellular level, replete with equations. Have you consulted this, as have we laypeople? Do you know that almost every study, from broad symptomology to cancer outcome, has shown great danger from long-term exposure to cell mast radiation, which studies are brushed aside by HC, WHO, ICNIRP, OAHPP et al by methodological nitpickiness, all the while discouraging such direct study? A meta-view such as one would expect from a MOH, would see past and through such attitudes, to recommend strong protective action.)

I certainly support your being "prepared to continue to have TPH staff work with LTCHS so as to ensure [...]", but only as it includes closer scrutiny of the independent (non-industry-connected) science, and broadens the scope to cover all electromagnetic insult to Torontonians, getting variously sicker and sicker as latter-day wireless mania is allowed its proliferation with hardly a peep from public "health" authorities. An eventual 1/2 of us to cancer is now predicted, 1/3 to dementia, among very many other strange 20th century developments continuing, as public health care costs continue their inexorable annual rise since, guess what, the later '90s mass proliferation of cell telephony. And the mass effects in dementia, cancer, etc., of the mass putting of radiative devices right up against heads, are just beginning. Your colleague MOH in Grey-Bruce acknowledges to me awareness of deleterious health effects which should be minimized, yet begs off acting on this awareness. Your colleagues in Halton emphasize to me dubiously that they pay attention to "credible" science, apparently oblivious to implications of using such an adjective, impugning as it does innumerable international scientists, as it does acquiesce in (well-documented) industry capture of process. Your colleagues in York Region are for now seeming - maybe in the wake of several anti-cell-mast battles, some ongoing - to take things a bit more seriously, it remaining to be seen how seriously and for how long, with the numerous suggestions proferred as to how they can act forthrightly.

Meanwhile, for one of many burgeoning bizarre examples, we just witnessed a third such recent live on-air incident, where a Canadian television news broadcaster suddenly speaks incoherently, half-self-aware, a neurological event doubtless precipitated in and by the xenobiotic synthetic electromagnetic soup they are condemned to operate in. A recent JAMA-published study graphically depicts brain alterations at regular cell phone use (confirming yet again various other such demonstrations of clear brain effect). A recent review published at NRC Press demonstrates clear & obvious danger from cell phone towers, as do two even more recent studies from Germany & Brazil, as wifi is likened to bringing a cell tower indoors, regardless of current regulatory standards and purported assurances based on fractions of a guideline unprotective for especially athermal effects. Copes' hapless OAHPP report you refer to, had to resort to cell phone & cell tower studies, as there is next to nothing on wifi itself, never mind long-term effect, never mind on the particularly vulnerable incapable of advocating for themselves, helpless residents overseen by LTCHS. So much science before and since attesting to danger, yet, truly ridiculous and disastrous in a public health context, "weight of evidence" persuasive to HC et al is laden by the corrupt $ of industry & abettors.

Tell us, why must we re-live, but on a surpassing scale, asbestos, tobacco, and so many other bioeffect travesties, things one presumes public health professionals have been educated about?

In your letter to myself of December 18, 2009, an apparent analogy was made in justifying TPH inaction re the dangers of wireless. The sample case at hand was of one adult-onset epileptic Torontonian (no drugs, no trauma), who suffers seizures when and only when exposed to even far below TPH "prudent avoidance" levels of wireless assault. (This person has since fled your Toronto, further worsened now with wireless utility meters, for a rural location of far lower ambient "electrosmog", and is until now fending off proposed approaching cell masts and wireless meters.) Such suffering under "acceptable" ambient radiation, seemed likened by you to a person susceptible to violent reaction to shellfish venturing into a restaurant from which TPH would not ban shellfish. Voluntary vs involuntary, private vs public, individual vs mass, and on & on, the issue re consumption or allowance of shellfish resembles not at all the case of TPH acquiescence in mass human experimentation with wireless mania, with already well-known consequences, without forcefully addressing the issue. Will you retract that apparent analogy, in an effort to restore some confidence in your own ability to consider these grave issues?

We remain prepared to assist closely any authority looked to by the general public, towards consideration and action independent of the industry-captured hierarchy that pertains in this field. It will eventually be seen that the regnant permissive regime, decried already for decades by learned dissenters who have been muscled out, will have formed a necessary ingredient behind a panoply of modern ailments that could have been curtailed, had public health authorities spoken out resolutely. In 1997, a petition was signed (you can be shown a copy, and likewise have substantiated anything else written here) by just about every public health scientist in the Boston area, around 100 names, against the then-imminent mass deployment of its cell phone network. That is the kind of science-based dissent that has gotten muscled out. Will you continue to go along with that?

As your letter was addressed to Lorraine, expect a separate reply from her.

Daryl Vernon

416 631 1495

61 Charleswood Dr.

M3H 1X5

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Woman claims cell phone radiation is workplace injury

CHBC News, Kelowna: Wednesday, March 16, 2011

http://www.globalregina.com/Woman+claims+cell+phone+radiation+workplace+injury/4452414/story.html

A North Okanagan woman says she was injured by radiation from her cell phone 13 years ago and she's been battling to prove it ever since.

Barb Makota, who used to sell cell phones, says she developed burning sores on her face whenever she put the devices on her face.

In 2000, she was diagnosed with electrical sensitivity and is now battling Work Safe BC to recognize her injuries.

Despite letters from a dozen doctors confirming her claims, Makota says her claims have been rejected by Work Safe BC.

She even has evidence from new thermographic images showing considerable damage to her brain, eyes, ears, face, neck, hands and arms.

Makota says she is still in constant pain.

She no longer uses a cell phone or a computer.

When she does watch TV, it's through a silver lined veil that blocks some of the electrical signal.

Makota is pointing a finger at the Canadian government and what she believes is a major flaw in our safety codes.

She is preparing for an appeal against Work Safe BC.

Iris / Mark

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

St. Petersburg, Russia, 16–17 October, 2000

Proceedings from the International workshop Clinical and physiological investigations of people highly exposed to electromagnetic fields

St. Petersburg, Russia, 16–17 October, 2000

Kjell Hansson-Mild, Monica Sandström and Eugene Lyskov (eds)

ebib.sub.su.se/arb/2001/arb2001_03.pdf

Good information about heart and nervous system affected by EMFs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Health concerns arise from Smart Meters

BCLocalNews

Electromagnetic radiation is a field of electrons flowing around an electric current like batteries, wires and appliances. In the body these are called "free radicals" which bombard our cells, weakening their structure and leaving them susceptible to ...

http://www.bclocalnews.com/opinion/letters/118806709.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parents upset about planned high school cell tower

abc7news.com

They've been leasing sites for cell phone towers for 15 years. ... looking at good research by the American Cancer Society, and we feel like this is safe ...

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/south_bay&id=8039472

Good Research ? How about No Research? or False Research? Someone needs to tell the American Cancer Society that their job is to STOP cancer not to spread it !

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radiation Fall Out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JDNJEW8MJs&feature=player_embedded

Magda

Web site www.weepinitiative.org e-mail contactweep@weepinitiative.org

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