Smart meter on left; standard analog meter on right
Do you or a member of your family have…Cancer - Insomnia - Dizziness -
High Blood Pressure - Heart Palpations -
Your "SMART METER" is a surveillance
device that monitors your "energy consumption
behavior" and it emits biologically destructive "pulsed" and "dirty electricity" EMF radiation in
your home, and it is UNLAWFUL because your power company has no easement (rightful
access) to do that!!
Another purpose - Your smart meter was put on your house for the sole purpose of emitting
a 905 MHz RF signal designed to dumb you down, and placate you, so you will allow the new
world order to do their takeover without you rioting. That's a mouthful but it's the truth. 905MHz
is the frequency that resonates within your brain cavity. The Federal Govt spend billions of your
tax dollars to subsidize your local utility to unwittingly alter your thought patterns.
Go to www.duckduckgo.com and type in "Barrie Trower smart meter" an expert on the effect of electromagnetic radiation on the brain. It isn't just your smart meter involved in this; it's your cellphone
and ELF antennas on your cellphone towers also.
How to beat the utility company at the Smart
The SAFE ELECTRIC METER REPLACEMENT KIT is designed to replace your "Smart Meter"
with an analog meter that is safe and sane and...
DOES NOT radiate your home with "dirty electricity" or pulsed data transmissions.
DOES NOT monitor your personal activities.
DOES NOT share your personal living habits with the world!
DOES NOT create "dirty electricity" like a digital meter.
DOES include a LEGAL NOTICE FORM to claim and reserve your right to install an analog
meter yourself if they won't do it for you! http://www.freedomtaker.com/
The truth is coming out.
Smart meters are dangerous to your health. Very dangerous.
And they have started quite a few house fires now.
The deadly drone attached to the side of your
There's more, lots
Hey, I personally bought an EMF meter to measure radiation coming off of 4 sets of power
lines near my son's house to make sure he wasn't being exposed to too much radiation.
We're talking four sets of multiple wires each at ultra high voltage looking at the length
of the insulators. The reading directly under several sets of transmission lines was up to
16 milligaus, but only a hundred feet away or so it dropped to background of .1milligaus.
Readings near the house and outbuildings were also background. Driving alongside the
road where there were three hi tension wires on the poles gave readings up to 6 milligaus.
But when I got home we had two of our analog meters changed out for digital smart meters
last year (without our knowledge). Putting the EMF meter up to the face of the digital smart meter
showed readings up to 113 milligaus. Lowest I got was in the 60's. You had to get around
twelve feet away before you got back down to .1 - .2 milligaus, background, both meters.
And I also have had a protective multiple plug strip which the computers and TV plugged
into go bad in the last three months. Smart meters are now notorious for that also. They are
also now being blamed on appliances speeding up and slowing down when they shouldn't be.
My woodstove blower fan does that and it didn't used to with the analog meter. I changed out
the rheostat but that didn't solve the problem. Looks like the smart meter is the culprit.
You can shield a smart meter by putting a
lead blanket around it, backside too.
Lead sheet can be purchased at http://www.rotometals.com/product-p/leadsheet8pound.htm
A piece 1/8" thick x 1' x 4' costs $75. You could put a 1'x1' piece on the backside. a 1' x 2'
piece around the barrel of the meter, and use the other 1' x 1' to fill in the round part on the
front. The front piece needs to be removable so the meter man can read the meter. If the
back and front are close to spaces you inhabit, like closer than four feet, I would double
the lead. 1/4" is probably too stiff to work with except for the front and the back unless you
had a meter sized piece of pipe or log to fold it around. Having shielded nuclear reactor
compartments where cobalt 60 hotspots existed in my younger days, lead being very dense,
was the material of choice to do so with. Enough negative data is now available on these
smart meters to warrant shielding them.
Smart meters have been associated with privacy issues, data security issues, and fire safety issues, but the biggest danger from RF (radio frequency) meters may be from the signals they give off while reporting their data to the central utility office.
A study conducted by the industry group, the Electric Power Research Institute, concluded that in their tests the radio frequency emissions of smart meters are well within federal safety guidelines. A Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) study titled, “Summary Discussion of RF Fields and the PG&E SmartMeter™ System” concluded that smart meters are “are in full compliance with Federal Communications Commission regulations by a very wide margin.”
But are they? Many people would disagree.
Joe Esposito from Owasso, Okla., had a smart meter installed on his home in 2011 as part of a pilot program developed by the Public Service Company of Oklahoma. Even though he asked that a meter not be installed on his home, Esposito found one mounted on the side of his house when he came home from work.
It was then his health problems started. Esposito started experiencing dental problems, from aching teeth to a constant tingling sensation. He also started to experience aches in his leg which only got worse at night.
After watching a video titled “Smart Meters & EMR: The Health Crisis of Our Time” by Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt, Esposito followed the advice in the video and installed some lead sheeting around the meter on the outside of his house. The results were dramatic. He had the first good night’s sleep in months and the pain in his leg was gone. Additional protection inside the home added later gave relief from many of his other symptoms. As an experiment, he would sometimes sleep without the protection and his pains would return.
Joe Esposito’s experience is not unique. Thousands of people have reported ringing in the ears, insomnia, headaches, dizziness, nausea, heart irregularities, memory loss, and anxiety after a smart meter was installed on their house or business.
According to a survey conducted by Dr. Ed Halteman, Ph.D., the number of people in the survey who had sleep problems doubled after smart meters were installed.
The survey also indicated that the top health issues suffered by the 318 residents in the survey who had smart meters installed on or near the home included sleep problems (49 percent), stress (43 percent), headaches (40 percent), ringing in the ears (38 percent) and heart problems (26 percent).
In May of 2011, the World Health Organization officially recognized that wireless radiation such as emitted by smart meters is a possible carcinogen.
People who also suffer from Electromagnetic Sensitivity (ES) also seem especially vulnerable to the effects of smart meters.
In recent years, there has been a 60-fold increase in cases of autism which may be explained by changes in the environment. A study by the Association for Comprehensive NeuroTherapy reports that there may be a correlation between fetal (pre-natal) or neo-natal (new-born) exposures to radiofrequency radiation and the increase in the incidents of autism.
Another phenomenon reported by smart meter users was the absence of pollinators in their yards. Residents report the absence of bees, butterflies, hummingbirds and other small insects since the meters were installed. (Some studies are reporting that RF radiation may be a contributing factor to Colony Collapse Disorder experienced in beehives.)
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM)
has released a report titled
“Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Fields Effect on Human Health” which warns people with a number of medical conditions to avoid smart meters and has also requested that the Public Utilities Commission of California impose “an immediate and complete moratorium on their [smart meter] use.”
While the AAEM acknowledges that studies such as those conducted by Electric Power Research Institute and PG&E indicate that the meters are safe, the academy contends that “existing FCC guidelines for RF safety that have been used to justify installation of ‘smart meters’ only look at thermal tissue damage and are obsolete, since many modern studies show metabolic and genomic damage from RF and ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) exposures below the level of intensity which heats tissues.”
Magda Havas, Ph.D., professor of Environmental & Resource Studies with Trent University in Ontario, Canada, said, “We are creating a potential time bomb. If smart meters are placed on every home, they will contribute significantly to our exposure and this is both unwise and unsafe.”
Jerry Flynn is a retired Canadian armed forces captain. While in service, Flynn was in signal intelligence and radio warfare. Flynn started looking at the potential dangers from smart meters at the request of his daughter who has three children.
Flynn was immediately concerned about the meters when he learned that the meters used wireless transmissions. He also learned that each smart meter has two radio transmitters inside, both transmitters pulsing microwave radiation which Flynn calls “the most dangerous [electromagnetic radiation] to the human brain.”
Flynn’s time in the military included a period of time the Russians experimented on U.S. embassy staff. Flynn said that the U.S. embassy in Moscow was bombarded with EMF six to eight hours a day five days a week by the Soviets at power levels that were 1/100 of what the U.S. and Canada permit now. They experimented with the same microwave frequencies that come off of standard household wireless appliances.
Between 1953 and 1976, the period of time the testing took place, two U.S. ambassadors died of cancer, one developed leukemia and eventually died from it; 16 women on the embassy staff developed breast cancer, and many others developed immune system disorders, high white blood cell counts, chronic fatigue, and muscle aches.
Flynn said that the United States knew about the testing within a year, but didn’t warn the embassy staff. The U.S. sent researchers over to the embassy with their own monitoring equipment to monitor the tests for themselves. They wanted to also find out the effect of low-level, long-term, non-thermal radiation would have on humans. Flynn said it took 10 years for the embassy staff to be told of the testing.
While most of the embassy staff was subjected to this radiation for a period of two to four years, Flynn points out that the exposure to radiation from a smart meter will be for the rest of your life.
Surprisingly, there is a second transmitter in a smart meter, called a “Zigbee.” This is a transmitter that the utility companies are not talking about now. There are plans for this transmitter to control up to 15 other “smart appliances” in your home. (Anything with a motor on it will eventually be a smart appliance that could be your furnace, refrigerator, dishwasher or “any other thing with a motor.”)
Flynn says these transmitters and smart appliances will be extremely dangerous, especially when used in addition to all the other wireless devices used such as cell phones, Wi-Fi routers, baby monitors, cordless phones – up to 30 devices that emit pulse radiation.
It is interesting to note that Apple advises its customers, “When carrying iPhone, keep it 1.5 cm (5/8 inch) or more away from your body to ensure exposure levels remain at or below the maximum levels.” Lloyds of London refuses to underwrite cell phone manufacturers against the risk of damage to a user’s health. (Cell phones and all the above-mentioned wireless devices operate in the same part of the electromagnetic spectrum as smart meters.)
Non industry-funded studies have clearly demonstrated a significant increase in cancer cases among individuals who have suffered from prolonged exposure to low-level microwaves, transmitted notably by radio antennas. The effects were best documented in meta-analyses that have been published and that include grouped results from several different studies: these analyses consistently showed an increased risk of brain cancer among regular users of a cell phone who have been exposed to microwaves for at least ten years.
Furthermore, the argument that brain cancer rates do not indicate an overall increase in incidence is not evidence that cell phones are safe: the latency for brain cancer in adults after environmental exposure can be long, up to 20-30 years. Most North Americans haven’t used cell phones extensively for that long. The evidence of the link between long-term cell phone use and brain cancer comes primarily from Northern Europe, where cell phones have been commonly used since the 1990s.
Children are especially at risk. In May 2012, the U.K.’s Office of National Statistics reported a 50 percent increase in incidence of frontal and temporal lobe tumors in children between 1999 and 2009. This statistic is especially disturbing since in May 2011, after reviewing the published scientific literature regarding cancers affecting cell phone users, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency radiation as a 2B, possible human carcinogen. Despite the absence of scientific consensus, the evidence is sufficiently compelling for any cautious parent to want to reduce their loved one’s exposure to RF/microwave emissions as much as possible, as recommended by various countries such as Austria, Belgium, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom.
Public fears about wireless smart meters are well-founded. They are backed by various medical authorities such as those of the Santa Cruz County(California) Public Health Department. These authorities are worried about the growing number of citizens who say they have developed electrohypersensitivity (EHS), especially since for many of them, the symptoms developed after the installation of such meters (it takes some time for most people to link the two events).
Since the turn of the millennium, people are increasingly affected by ambient microwaves due to the growing popularity of wireless devices such as cell phones and Wi-Fi Internet. Therefore, the mass deployment of smart grids could expose large chunks of the general population to alarming risk scenarios without their consent. According to seven surveys done in six European countries between 2002 and 2004, about 10% of Europeans have become electrosensitive, and experts fear that percentage could reach 50% by 2017. The most famous person to publicly reveal her electrosensitivity is Gro Harlem Brundtland, formerly Prime Minister of Norway and retired Director of the World Health Organization (WHO).
While there is no consensus on the origins and mechanisms of EHS, many physicians and other specialists around the world have become aware that EHS symptoms (neurological dermatological, acoustical, etc.) seem to be triggered by exposure to EMF levels well below current international exposure limits, which are established solely on short-term thermal effects (2). Organizations such as the Austrian Medical Association and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine have recognized that the ideal way to treat of EHS is to reduce EMF exposure.
Therefore, caution is warranted because the growing variety of RF/microwave emissions produced by many wireless devices such as smart meters have never been tested for their potential biological effects.
While the specific pathways to cancer are not fully understood, it is scientifically unacceptable to deny the weight of the evidence regarding the increase in cancer cases in humans that are exposed to high levels of RF/microwave radiation.
The statement that « there is no established mechanism by which a radio wave could induce an adverse effect on human tissue other than by heating » is incorrect, and reflects a lack of awareness and understanding of the scientific literature on the subject. In fact, more than a thousand studies done on low intensity, high frequency, non-ionizing radiation, going back at least fifty years, show that some biological mechanisms of effect do not involve heat. This radiation sends signals to living tissue that stimulate biochemical changes, which can generate various symptoms and may lead to diseases such as cancer.
Even though RF/microwaves don’t have the energy to directly break chemical bonds, unlike ionizing radiation such as X-rays, there is scientific evidence that this energy can cause DNA damage indirectly leading to cancer by a combination of biological effects. Recent publications have documented the generation of free radicals, increased permeability of the blood brain barrier allowing potentially toxic chemicals to enter the brain, induction of genes, as well as altered electrical and metabolic activity in human brains upon application of cell phone RF/microwaves similar to those produced by smart meters.
These effects are cumulative and depend on many factors including RF/microwave levels, frequency, waveform, exposure time, biovariability between individuals and combination with other toxic agents. Clear evidence that these microwaves are indeed bioactive has been shown by the fact that low-intensity EMFs have proven clinically useful in some circumstances. Pulsed EMFs have long been used to successfully treat bone fractures that are resistant to other forms of therapy. More recently, frequency-specific, amplitude-modulated EMFs have been found useful to treat advanced carcinoma and chronic pain.
High frequency EMFs such as the microwaves used in cell phones, smart meters, Wi-Fi and cordless ‘‘DECT’’ phones, appear to be the most damaging when used commonly. Most of their biological effects, including symptoms of electrohypersensitivity, can be seen in the damage done to cellular membranes by the loss of structurally-important calcium ions. Prolonged exposure to these high frequencies may eventually lead to cellular malfunction and death.
Furthermore, malfunction of the parathyroid gland, located in the neck just inches from where one holds a cell phone, may actually cause electrohypersensitivity in some people by reducing the background level of calcium ions in the blood. RF/microwave radiation is also known to decrease the production of melatonin, which protects against cancer, and to promote the growth of existing cancer cells.
In recommending that the Precautionary Principle be applied in EMF matters, the European Environment Agency’s Director Jacqueline McGlade wrote in 2009: “We have noted from previous health hazard histories such as that of lead in petrol, and methyl mercury, that ‘early warning’ scientists frequently suffer from discrimination, from loss of research funds, and from unduly personal attacks on their scientific integrity. It would be surprising if this is not already a feature of the present EMF controversy… » Such unfortunate consequences have indeed occurred.
The statement in the Le Devoir letter that « if we consider that a debate should take place, it should focus exclusively on the effects of cell phones on health » is basically an acknowledgement that there is at least some reason to be concerned about cell phones. However, while the immediate exposure from a cell phone is of much greater intensity than the exposure from smart meters, cell phone use is temporary.
Wireless smart meters typically produce atypical, relatively potent and very short pulsed RF/microwaves whose biological effects have never been fully tested. They emit these millisecond-long RF bursts on average 9,600 times a day with a maximum of 190,000 daily transmissions and a peak level emission two and a half times higher than the stated safety signal, as the California utility Pacific Gas & Electric recognized before that State’s Public Utilities Commission. Thus people in proximity to a smart meter are at risk of significantly greater aggregate exposure than with a cell phone, not to mention the cumulative levels of RF/microwaves that people living near several meters are exposed to.
People are exposed to cell phone microwaves primarily in the head and neck, and only when they use their device. With smart meters, the entire body is exposed to the microwaves, which increases the risk of overexposure to many organs.
In addition to these erratic bursts of modulated microwaves coming from smart meters that are transferring usage data to electric, gas and water utilities, wireless and wired smart (powerline communication) meters are also a major source of ‘’dirty electricity’’ (electrical interference of high frequency voltage transients typically of kilohertz frequencies). Indeed, some scientists, such as American epidemiologist Sam Milham, believe that many of the health complaints about smart meters may also be caused by dirty electricity generated by the « switching » power supply activating all smart meters. Since the installation of filters to reduce dirty electricity circulating on house wiring has been found to relieve symptoms of EHS in some people, this method should be considered among the priorities aimed at reducing potential adverse impacts. Indeed, the Salzburg State (Austria) Public Health Department confirms its concern about the potential public health risk when in coming years almost every electric wire and device will emit such transient electric fields in the kilohertz-range due to wired smart meters.
safe than sorry
The apparent adverse health effects noted with smart meter exposure are likely to be further exacerbated if smart appliances that use wireless communications become the norm and further increase unwarranted exposure.
To date, there have been few independent studies of the health effects of such sources of more continuous but lower intensity microwaves. However, we know after decades of studies of hazardous chemical substances, that chronic exposure to low concentrations of microwaves can cause equal or even greater harm than an acute exposure to high concentrations of the same microwaves.
This is why so many
scientists and medical experts urgently recommend that measures following the
Precautionary Principle be applied immediately — such as using wired meters
— to reduce biologically inappropriate microwave exposure. We are not
advocating the abolishment of RF technologies, only the use of common sense and
the development and implementation of best practices in using these technologies
in order to reduce exposure and risk of health hazards.
1. Scientific papers on EMF health effects
2. Explanation and studies on electrosensitivity
3. Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh Canada Free Press
Once a week I check with bated breath my conventional meter attached to the side of my house. I want to make sure no smart meter had been installed in my absence and without my permission. I have written to my utility company that I do not wish to have a smart meter installed, I mailed the letter return receipt requested to make sure that they cannot claim non-receipt.
I called the utility office and again, voiced my desire to keep my conventional meter. I received a form letter, telling me that there are no plans yet, smart meters are safe, and there is no opt out, please check the website, etc. I posted a large sign by my conventional meter that they do not have my permission to install a smart meter. When the meter is read, the sign disappears or I find it in the grass. I gave up replacing it. I seem to fight the monopolistic goliath who is the only provider of power.
More and more people who had been harmed by electromagnetic pulses are taking action against their utility company across the nation. Texans Against Smart Meters are considering a class action lawsuit in reference to Fourth Amendment rights violation and health issues commenced or exacerbated by the installation of the Advance Metering System, better known as smart meters.
Smart meter removal from one’s home is not enough. Within a five square mile area there is a collecting point of information from all meters and a transmitter receives information from all the collecting points within 125 miles of its location. This transmitter sends all the collected data to a master location, the “mother ship” where everyone’s information is stored, analyzed, and sold to a third party who is interested in the household’s pattern of usage, consumption of electricity, or possibly “illegal” activity in that home.
During peak usage, the utility company can turn off the power, adjust the thermostat from afar, or turn off entire grid in an “emergency” such as the catastrophic failure of power during the 2012 D.C/Maryland/Virginia straight line winds.
Cyber-attacks and solar flares can also take down an entire section of the smart grid with its smart meters. A person, who wishes to know when the homeowner is at work or on vacation in order to rob the place, can steal the streaming data from the smart meter (which pulses information several times a minute) by standing outside the home with a handheld device.
I have listed issues and negative health effects from smart meters in my previous articles. Links to four of my columns are found at the end of this article.
Louis Donovan of Carson, CA talks about his heart and pacemaker disruptions from electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emitted by his smart meter which stopped his heart 4 times.
Abstracts of articles describe the link of low-level microwave radiation and other frequency ranges of radiation exposure to the development of tumors, to DNA (genotoxicity), to production of stress proteins, to heart disturbances, to general brain effects, to blood brain barrier and nerve effects, to immune reactions, and to general functional impairment.
De-Kun Li, senior researcher at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland, CA, has shown that EMF exposure in the womb is linked to increased risk in childhood obesity.
In Hawaii, an electrical contractor in Kauai “recorded a smart meter pulse at a business with emissions more than 1300% than KIUC’s claim.” Josh de Sol said, “emissions over a 24 hour period, amount to 3.2 hours of exposure to modulated microwave frequency radiation at over 2 milliwatts per square meter which is 240 times greater than what the utility company claims.”
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court has ruled on July 12, 2012 that Maine Public Utilities Commission has failed to resolve health and safety issues resulting from the installation of smart meters by Central Maine Power Co. According to Josh Del Sol, opponents to smart meters “argued that utility regulators ignored their legal mandate to ensure the delivery of safe and reasonable utility services.” Sadly, the $200 million project, which replaced 615,000 analog meters with smart meters, is complete. Federal stimulus money provided half the cost. The court’s decision appears ineffectual since the smart meters are already installed.
Josh Del Sol, producer and director of the movie, Take Back Your Power, writes that “PECO suspended installations of smart meters after local fire officials in Philadelphia attributed them to the cause of several recent home fires.”
To make matters worse, it was discovered that smart meters lack UL and CSA approval and safety testing. “UL has developed a standardized set of safety requirements for utility meters, including smart meters. Even though there are standards, and UL says utilities need to ensure testing, no utility to date (that we know of) has been able to provide evidence of any UL or CSA certification, or accredited safety testing.” (Josh del Sol)
UL, according to their website, is a global independent safety science company offering expertise across five areas: product safety, environment, life and health, verification services, and knowledge services.
CSA is a global provider of product testing and certification services for US, Canada and countries worldwide for many products and components.
People should be gravely concerned that utilities have installed and are installing at a rapid pace the untested, unapproved device called smart meter which controls all electrical usage, causes fires, and serious health effects. On my recent trip to Europe, I photographed banks of smart meters everywhere, installed with European Union funds.
Josh del Sol described the interview with John Horgan, New Democrat Party Energy Critic in British Columbia. Del Sol asked him why British Columbia Hydro is installing unapproved devices. His answer was, “I don’t know… I don’t know. It’s mind-numbing, isn’t it?”
We do know why utilities are installing smart meters in the U.S. – it is a convenient way to control our energy use and thus our independence by using the ruse of convenience, modernization, cheaper energy, expedience, and better service. Nothing can be further from the truth. Smart meters are convenient ways to spy on the populace, charge them more per kilowatt hour of consumption, reduce consumption by cutting power delivery, control the population and its health, reduce costs for utilities who no longer have to worry about storage capacity and building additional storage plants which are expensive, reducing costs of wire maintenance under and above ground, and eliminating meter readers for conventional meters.
When there's a way to do things cheaper and
boost profits, you can count on industry to discover how. And so, it's no
surprise that the utility companies have figured out a way to spare the cost
of sending energy meter readers out to customer's homes every month. Instead,
they're cutting expenses (and jobs) by relying on devices called "smart
meters." These energy meters track power usage in your home in real time
and then send a detailed report directly to the power company via wireless
technology. The utility company then uses the information to bill you.
At first take, it sounds like a good idea, eliminating those pesky visits from the electric company. One could argue that smart meters are "green" since they eliminate the need to have company reps drive from house to house. In fact, utility companies rave about the green benefits of smart meters. They allow the companies to track and manage energy flows more efficiently, establishing a so-called "green grid" across large areas. They also make it possible to identify outages quickly and efficiently. Plus, the meters let customers carefully track their own energy consumption so they can figure out where to cut back.
Within the next three years, smart meters will be installed in 65 million homes--half the homes in the US. But not everybody is happy about this. In fact, a number of lawsuits have been filed charging the utility companies with various violations related to smart meters. Opponents say that the meters not only compromise privacy and raise expenses for consumers, but they also pose a dangerous health hazard.
At issue is the fact that smart meters rely on wireless technology, and some say this isn't safe given the volume of radio frequency waves the meters emit. Critics claim that smart meters literally fry consumers in their own homes; advocates say such complaints are rubbish. They claim that smart meters put out only a miniscule amount of electromagnetic energy, and anyway, it's a harmless technology. It's not easy to separate the truth from the PR.
For instance, the benign-seeming Smart Grid Consumer Collaborative, a nonprofit which claims on its website to be dedicated to providing "long-lasting sustainable benefits to consumers" writes, "You would have to be exposed to the radio frequency from a smart meter for 375 years to get a dose equivalent to that of one year of 15-minutes-per-day cell phone use." The group asserts that smart meters emit lower levels of radio frequency than cell phones, baby monitors, satellite televisions, and microwaves. This might be reassuring, except for the fact that on closer inspection, it turns out that the Smart Grid Consumer Collaborative has a dazzling array of utility company representatives on its board, rendering its pronouncements a bit suspect.
Opponents say that, in fact, smart meters emit far more radiation than cell phones do--hundreds of times more. The Center for Electrosmog Prevention, a California nonprofit, claims that one smart meter emits radiation equivalent to what you'd get from 160 cell phones. The group bases its figures on independent research led by radiation expert Dr. Daniel Hirsh of the University of California San Diego. Dr. Hirsh contends that the utility companies have essentially done some fancy (and faulty) math to arrive at the low emissions figures they tout.
And he's not alone in his critique. Other independent studies have measured pulses from smart meters up to 1000 times greater than what the typical cell phone puts out. The experts express concern not only about the strength of the signals emanating from smart meters, but also, about the frequency of pulses. They say there's a notable discrepancy between what industry claims and what independent observers report. While the utility companies say the meters pulse at most once an hour, independent analyses show they can pulse as often as every 30 seconds, blasting out electromagnetic waves each time.
No matter whether the meters emit more or less EMF pollution than cell phones, the real question is how they affect health. Few studies have been done to specifically assess the impact of smart meters over time on human health, so the experts have been relying on cell phone studies, since the technology is similar. As we've reported in the past, there's plenty of independent research raising alarms about the link between cell phones, brain alteration, and cancer, but there's also plenty of controversy about those results. The establishment chooses to ignore the incriminating research, instead citing industry-funded studies that conclude cell phones are quite safe. In any case, remember that cell phones are held directly against your head; smart meters are not.
Meanwhile, consumer complaints about the smart meters mount. Remember, evidence indicates that smart meters expose you to far more EMFs than cell phones do -- although not focused on one part of your body. Nevertheless, there have been numerous reports from consumers suffering from severe headaches, seizures, insomnia, dizziness, palpitations, joint pain, migraines, and tinnitus after extended smart meter exposure. There may be no actual connection, but then again. Meanwhile, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine issued a recommendation in July that "that no Smart Meters be [in the homes of patients with neurological or neurodegenerative diseases, genetic defects, cancer, and other conditions] and that Smart Meters be removed to a reasonable distance from patients' homes..."
While some states allow consumers to opt out and retain their old meters instead of having a new smart meter installed, others do not. And as mentioned above, the complaints about smart meters extend beyond the realm of health. Some consumers fear that utility companies will use the technology to track electronic activity in private households. Because smart meters provide such detailed information, your energy company could, for instance, determine your television viewing choices and patterns, or track your internet usage. Again, there have already been a spate of lawsuits against utility companies charging privacy violations related to smart meters.
No matter how extensive the list of concerns is, smart meters are here to stay for the time being, anyway. As an informed consumer, you should find out if you can opt out when the installation team arrives at your door, in case you wish to exercise that option. Even if the exposure risk is minimal, why risk any exposure at all if you don't have to? Then again, you can always wear tin foil over your head -- just kidding -- or put the foil over the meter, which is actually a viable option.
How to cut your electricity bill in half
Back to dogpage