Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Burden of Proof

To the City Commission of Battle Creek, on Tuesday, September 6, 2016, I quoted parts of this letter written to the North Carolina Utility Commission, and said:

The precautionary principle states that the introduction of a new product or process whose ultimate effects are disputed or unknown should be resisted.  It is a form of risk management, with the intention of reducing risk.  If an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking the action.  Which would be all of you in regards to smart metering technology.

This is a letter, co-authored by a group of scientists and health professionals who together have co-authored many peer-reviewed studies on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation. 

"The majority of scientific literature related to radiofrequency radiation stems from cell phone studies.  There is strong evidence that people who use a cell phone held directly to their ear for more than 10 years are at significantly increased risk of developing gliomas of the brain and acoustic neuromas of the auditory nerve."
"Smart meters and cell phones occupy similar frequency bands of the electromagnetic spectrum, meaning that cell phone research can apply to smart meter radiofrequency radiation.  Smart meter radiofrequency radiation consists of frequent very intense but very brief pulses throughout the day.  Because smart meter exposure is over a 24 hour period, it can be very prolonged.  Pulses can average 9,600 times a day... and because there is building evidence that the sharp high-intensity pulses are particularly harmful, the cell phone study findings are applicable when discussing adverse health impacts from smart meters."  
"While the strongest evidence for hazards coming from radiofrequency radiation is for cancer, there is a growing body of evidence that some people develop a condition called electromagnetic hypersensitivity. "

I did, once smart meters were installed where I live. 

"These individuals respond to being in the presence of radiofrequency radiation with a variety of symptoms including headaches...."

These professionals have said:

"There is absolutely no safe level of exposure established for radiofrequency radiation."

So, given this information from these educated professionals and their studies, the burden of proof of safety is now on all of you.  So where is your proof that smart meters are indeed safe?

Thank you for listening.  May you all truly be blessed.  

(End of three minute "General Public Comment")

Speaking of "burden of proof," I've come across a couple of new websites with more scientific studies on radiofrequency radiation:

No comments:

Post a Comment

5G: Increasing Possibilities Exponentially

US Senator Blumenthal Raises Concerns on 5G Wireless Technology  Health Risks at United States Senate Hearing "We're kind...