"Sudden Aging" & Smart Meters

     "Sudden aging" is how some have described the myriad of symptoms that can occur when one experiences sensitivity to the vast array of man-made electromagnetic fields permeating our modern world. And feeling like I had suddenly aged tremendously definitely describes my experience, shortly after new utility meters were installed where I live.  I had deep, dark circles and huge bags under my eyes.  A friend whom I hadn't seen in a while asked me what had happened to my eyes, and said she had never seen me look so bad.  She was being honest and sincere and I knew she was deeply concerned about me.  I don't think I had ever seen myself look that "bad" either.  But a month of severe insomnia, waking up every few hours with heart palpitations, and feeling like I was being electrocuted throughout the night, is probably why I looked that way!

Our bodies rest, heal, and repair when we sleep.  When our sleep is chronically disrupted, as can happen after a new (wireless/smart/advanced/electronic/AMR ERT/AMI/radio frequency) utility meter is installed, our bodies are not given the chance to heal, rest and repair, thus aging can become dramatic.  Electromagnetic fields, or EMFs, are said to cause "subliminal stress" that puts the body into a fight-or-flight mode, even while sleeping, making restful and healing sleep less attainable.

In our modern world we are constantly being exposed to EMFs; from cell phones, to wireless laptops, WiFi networks, a myriad of wireless appliances and gadgets, and now the new utility meters.  Which is why it is so very important we have a "safe" environment at night for healing sleep.  However, when smart meters are installed on our homes, they are continuously sending millisecond bursts of radio frequency microwave radiation throughout our environment.  Radio frequency radiation, whether from a cell phone, WiFi, new utility meter, or any other wireless device, does not stop at walls, doors, furniture, or flesh.  We don't necessarily feel the millisecond pulses of radiation, but our biology does.  That is why, for those of us more sensitive to the pulses of radiation, the new utility meters can severely disrupt our normal nighttime rest, healing and repair cycle.

Pulsed radio frequency radiation that the new utility meters emit explained the mystery of the pain returning in my "cell-phone ear," along with sudden and severe insomnia, heart palpitations, feeling like I was being electrocuted, and like I had suddenly developed severe arthritis in just about every joint in my body.  I did not have any of these symptoms prior to new utility meters being installed.

Our natural gas company, SEMCO Energy, tells us that their new meters are "not smart meters," but that they do emit micro-pulses of microwave radiation.    

Electromagnetic fields don't seem to be something we really want to fool around with.  I've talked with representatives at the electric company, the natural gas company, and the water department, and none of them seem to have a thoroughly understanding of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and health risks associated with them.  How can those who don't thoroughly understand something, tell you that it's safe?

Dr. Martin Blank, PhD, Dept. of Physiology, Columbia University, and spokesperson for the International Scientist Appeal on Electromagnetic Fields, explains that damage is occurring to DNA at "virtually all levels of exposure."  

The following quotes are from an Abstract by J.L. Phillips, Department of Chemistry, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO,  N.P. Singh, Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, and H. Lai, Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA:

"A major concern of the adverse effects of exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic field is cancer induction. Since the majority of cancers are initiated by damage to a cell’s genome, studies have been carried out to investigate the effects of electromagnetic fields on DNA and chromosomal structure." 

"RFR (radio frequency radiation) exposure does indeed appear to affect DNA damage and repair..."

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is becoming more widely recognized, and the percentage of people who experience it ranges from about 1.5% of the population in Sweden, to as high as 13.3% in Taiwan, with the United States at about 3%.  I would say that for about every 10 people I talk to about EHS, usually at least one of the people are either also sensitive to EMFs, or know someone else who is.  

I've heard some call EHS a functional or environmental disability, because it's not something that would necessarily be treated by a doctor, though a doctor or health care practitioner versed in radiation poisoning could offer suggestions as far as detoxifying the body and building up the immune system.  "Treatment" for EHS seems to primarily involve altering the environment where the person experiencing EHS spends their time, especially their sleep-time.  

After the new utility meters were installed, and when I began to question whether or not this life was worth living, I knew I had to do something to reduce the EMFs in my environment.  Here's a list of some of the steps taken: 

• Wrapped new utility meters in lead sheeting (lead blocks radiation)
• Removed the grounding/earthing sheet from my bed (because the ground outside where the grounding rod was buried tested unusually high for electricity)
• Eliminated the wireless computer mouse and returned to a hard-wired mouse
• Turned off the wireless feature on the computer
• Turned off the WiFi feature on the modem
• Eliminated the iPad from my environment 
• Keeping the cell phone off most of the time, and pulling the battery out at night and when not in use
• Using the landline phone instead of the cell phone
• Turning off all the electric breakers at night, except for the furnace

The measures have been successful because I've been sleeping much, much better, thank goodness! 

Over 200 scientists have now signed The International Scientist Appeal to the United Nations and the World Health Organization, requesting greater levels of protection for humans and wildlife to electromagnetic fields and wireless technology.  Allowable levels in the United States and Canada far exceed allowable levels in other countries, for some reason, and professionals who do understand electromagnetic fields, are calling for the U.N. to strengthen its advisories on EMF risks for humans.

Bottom line is that the new utility meters are not proven safe, and many professionals are now saying they could be extremely harmful.  I know that they've been harmful to me.  And I know that I'm not the only one.

If you live in Michigan, please call your State Representative right now, and ask them to support the Analog Choice Bill, HB4916, which will give us a choice to keep our 100% mechanical, 100% analog, time-tested for safety, utility meters, without having to pay exorbitant fees to do so.  You can find more information about that on my blog here.

If you don't live in Michigan but are concerned about the new utility meters, please speak out!  Talk to everyone you know, and some you don't know, about your concerns and why you feel that way.  We can make a difference.

Thank you for reading ~ May We All Truly Be Blessed

Sources & more information:

• The Latest Form of Pollution: Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Hyla Cass, MD
• Electromagnetic Fields Stress Living Cells, Martin Blank, Ph.D., Dept. of Physiology, Columbia University, NY, NY; Reba Goodman, Ph.D., Dept. of Pathology, Columbia University, NY, NY
• Cell Phone Task Force - Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)
• Electromagnetic Fields and DNA Damage, J.L. Phillips, Department of Chemistry, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO; N.P. Singh, Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; and H. Lai, Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
• Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity - an increasing challenge to the medical profession, L. Hendendahl, M. Carlburg, L. Hardell
• Business Wire: International Scientist Appeal to U.N. to Protect Humans and Wildlife from Electromagnetic Fields and Wireless Technology
• EMFscientist.org
• BioInitiative Report: A Rational for Biologically-based Exposure Standards for Low-Intensity Electromagnetic Radiation
• Electromagnetic Radiation Safety - Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS), Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley
• Wireless Utility Meter Safety Impacts - Final Results Summary, Ed Halteman, Ph.D.
• Smart Meter Education Network in Michigan, USA
• Smart Grid Awareness
• Take Back Your Power

And The Story Continues...

At the January 5, 2016 City Commission meeting, the City of Battle Creek was introducing a Resolution that would allow water customers to have the transmitter part of their new "smart" water meter installed at a distance, up to 100 feet, from their home.  I gave an impromptu comment about that Resolution at about 29:00 here.  This is the approximate script of what I said: 

I’m here to speak about Resolution 47, the remote placement of the device that is the transmitting part of the new water meters.  While this is a Band-Aid, it definitely does not address the real issue of smart meters.

Smart meters are not proven safe.  We have not gone one generation with the level of radio frequency that we are exposed to today.  There is only a small percent of the population, about 3% in the United States, but up to 12% in other countries, that actually feel the effects of the radiation.  Like myself, it took about 6 months before I started feeling pain from my cell phone.  And it took about six months after we had encoder-receiver-transmitter gas meters installed for me to start feeling the pain again in my phone ear, and then a plethora of other symptoms to develop.  

But, like I’m saying, this is a Band-Aid.  All we are doing is moving the radiation a little bit further away from our living quarters, which, hey, that is good, because the pulsing, these meters pulse radiation, and it’s numerous times a minute.  Even though some of them say they only wake-up once a month, when the meter reader drives by or when they go to collect the information, they pulse all the time.

Our gas meters, we were told by the company, pulse 10.67 times a minute.  And these micro-pulses, what they do, whether you feel it or not, it’s when we sleep that the body heals and repairs, it’s kind of hard to go anywhere these days without experiencing wireless radiation.  You go into Meijers and they have WiFi.  So we’re constantly being bombarded everyday by this, but we need to have a safe environment where our body can actually shut-down, rest and repair.

Now, having one of these meters 100 feet or so away from our home will help, but we’re still blanketing the environment with more and more radio frequency than we’ve never experienced before.  We have not gone one generation with the amount of wireless technology we have today.  And even the government says that the studies for non-thermal radiation, that which is radiated by these smart meters, the electronic meters, the wireless meters, the encoder-receiver-transmitters, studies are inconclusive, yet when you look, when you do searches there are studies coming up all over the world.  

There are countries that have banned and outlawed WiFi in schools which utilize radio frequencies very similar to the smart meters.  There are countries that have banned WiFi in schools.  Why?  Because children, and the elderly, and pregnant women, are more susceptible to this pulsed radiation than regular adults, however about 3% of the population in the United States are like me and feel, if not immediate effects, within a short period of time, harmful effects.

So, I just want to say that this is just a Band-Aid.  We are not addressing the real issue of the harm that these wireless devices create.  And it could take 10 to 20 years.  Cancers don’t develop overnight.  It takes 10 to 15 to 20 years for cancers to develop.

I’m just saying that this is a Band-Aid.  Even though it’s going to get it away from our sleeping areas, perhaps, and allow us to do some healing and repairing, we’re still poisoning ourselves with this.

Thank you for listening.  May you all be blessed.

 Later I gave a General Public Comment, at about 70:00 into the recording, where I said:

Regarding what Mr. Dopp said, the FCC is not a health regulation agency. They service the wireless industry. 

Wireless utility meters and smart meters are a source of non-thermal electromagnetic radio-frequency radiation, which means, they do not generate heat. Because they don’t generate heat, there is no early warning, no physiological means by which most people can feel and recognize that they are being affected at a biological and metabolic level by a wireless utility meter. 

There are no government standards (in North America) that establish safe human exposure limits for non-thermal radiation, that which is utilized by the new wireless water meters. When utility companies insist that the levels of electromagnetic radiation their products radiate fall well within government limits, they are referring only to the limits for thermal radiation, not non-thermal. 

On May 11, 2015, 190 scientists from 39 countries submitted an "International EMF Scientist Appeal" to His Excellency Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations. These scientists have collectively published over 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on the biological and health effects of non-thermal electromagnetic radiation. The Appeal now has 217 scientist signatures. 

Dr. Martin Blank, from the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at Columbia University, says, (quote): 

"We are scientists and engineers, and I am here to tell you - we have created something that is harming us, and it is getting out of control! Putting it bluntly, they are damaging the living cells in our bodies and killing many of us prematurely.” 

There are videos of live blood analysis that clearly show the harmful effects from non-thermal smart meter radiation. Subjects have blood samples taken both before and after a 2 minute exposure to smart meters. All samples show damage to red blood cells, yet most test subjects feel nothing. 

The important thing is that no one has been able to show conclusively that smart meter radiation is safe. And in 2011 the World Health Organization reclassified radio frequency electromagnetic radiation as a “possible carcinogen,” which means that the wireless devices the City of Battle Creek Water Department, and all of our utility companies are installing, may cause cancer. 

The City of Battle Creek’s mission statement says, in part, that they want to ensure a safe community, yet admit to having no documentation proving the safety of their new wireless utility meters. Perhaps it is time to re-write the mission statement, or, review your approval of wireless smart meters. 

Thank you for listening. May you all be blessed.

~

October 20th Battle Creek City Commission Meeting

Once again, I spoke about smart meters at the City Commission meeting.  Public comments are limited to only three minutes, so I try to pack the most amount of information in, which is why I don't go into much detail, but have posted the links to the studies I mentioned.  The video of the meeting is here, and I start speaking at about 74:37.  While the buzzer is still buzzing, the Mayor addresses the audience, though I finish my speech before the buzzer ends.  Below is a script of what I said:

My comment is regarding the new utility meters the City of Battle Creek Water Department, Consumers Energy, and SEMCO Energy have been installing on our homes, which utilize radio frequencies. The following two studies are from PubMed.gov, a website of biomedical literature: 

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity - an increasing challenge to the medical profession: Some people exposed to electromagnetic radiation, including the frequencies utilized by the new water meters, develop Electromagnetic hypersensitivity. While some cannot discriminate between an active radio frequency signal and placebo, others showed observable changes following exposure; reactions in the pupil, changes in heart rhythm, damage to red blood cells, and disturbed glucose metabolism in the brain.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26372109

Self-reporting of symptom development from exposure to radiofrequency fields of wireless smart meters in Victoria, Australia: a case series: Shows the most frequently reported symptoms to be insomnia, headaches, tinnitus, fatigue, cognitive disturbances, abnormal sensations, and dizziness, and pointed to the possibility that smart meters may have unique characteristics that lower people's threshold for symptom development.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25478801

Comments on the Draft Report by the California Council on Science & Technology “Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters,” by Daniel Hirsh, Nuclear Expert & Lecturer, University of California, Santa Cruz: Showing that smart meters produce between 50 & 160 times more cumulative whole body exposure than the cell phone.  http://www.committeetobridgethegap.org/pdf/110212_RFrad_comments.pdf

The fact remains that the new radio frequency smart utility meters have not been proven safe, yet evidence they cause harm continues to grow.

The fact is that we have not gone one generation using the level of wireless devices we are today, so we humans are the guinea pigs in this very first long-term study, with many of us already suffering the consequences of unproven to be safe technology. 

The fact is that the Water Department has been working on an “opt-out” program for over three months now. I can understand how it may be difficult to word an opt-out program for something that many of us were forced into in the first place. But the bottom line is, we just want them removed. 

Thank you for listening. May you all be blessed.

* 

The City of Battle Creek's Response To My Questions

Because the City Commissioners are the "gatekeepers" of the city, at the last Battle Creek City Commission meeting I submitted two questions in regards to my concerns of the safety of the new utility meters the City Commissioners are welcoming into the city:

What evidence do you have of the safety of the new utility meters, all of them, water, gas and electric, other than what comes from the manufacturer?

And do you have any independent third-party testing showing, or proving that the new utility meters are indeed perfectly safe?

Though I did not submit a Freedom of Information Request, the Clerk's office submitted one on my behalf, and was then kind enough to waive the fee, "this one time."

The City Clerk, Victoria Houser, wrote in her letter dated Monday, September 21, 2015:

"The Water Department has indicated they have no documents from independent parties related to the meters."

She also sent a "DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORD," which stated:

Your request is being denied in part for the following reason(s):

Is not in the possession of the City.  No independent 3rd party testing.  No information on gas and electric meters.

They admitted outright that they have no proof that the new utility meters are safe.  They admitted outright that they have not seen documentation of safety from independent third parties, and they have no information about the safety of the new gas and electric meters they are allowing to be installed also.  

Ms. Houser also provided a memorandum that the Water Department received from the City of Grand Haven, Department of Public Works.  The memorandum was written by William Hunter, Director of Public Works, explaining his understanding of RF and Smart Meters.  The memorandum came with two Radio Frequency comparison charts and a propaganda sheet from a "Utility Cooperative" in Hawaii.

Perhaps they don't know that 

the RF comparison charts 

have been proven wrong...

"The problem is, they've compared apples and oranges.  They looked at whole-body exposure from a Smart Meter, and compared it to the dose to the ear from a cell phone, instead of looking at the whole-body dose from the cell phone and comparing it to the whole-body dose from the smart meter." 

"Secondly, they assumed 100% duty cycle for the smart meter, and a 1% duty cycle for the cell phone; you're only using the cell phone probably an hour a day on average.  But they didn't correct for that.  So they didn't look at the cumulative exposure.  Ninety-nine percent of the time the cell phone wasn't producing radiation, but they assumed that 100% of the time the smart meter would.  In the smart meter figure they'd exaggerated a little bit, 50% would probably be a reasonable number.  But in any case, when you correct for these two factors, the whole-body and the cumulative part of it, rather than a cell phone being 100 times more exposure than a smart meter, the smart meter turns out to be roughly 100 times more cumulative exposure than the cell phone."

"...the cumulative whole body exposure from a Smart Meter at 3 feet appears to be approximately two orders of magnitude higher than that of a cell phone, rather than two orders of magnitude lower."

Quotes from Daniel Hirsch, Senior Lecturer on Nuclear Policy at UCSC.  YouTube video link here, another article with the video here, and his Draft Report, "Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters," here.  

In my humble opinion, the information about radiation exposure from Daniel Hirsch, Senior Lecturer on Nuclear Policy at the University of California Santa Cruz, holds more weight than the information from William Hunter, Director of Public Works in Grand Haven, Michigan.  

Is this not serious carelessness on the part of the City Commissioners, allowing these unproven to be safe devices to be installed all throughout the city, exposing the citizens to questionable amounts of radiation?

Bless Us All!

For more information:

• EMFScientists.org
• The BioInitiative Report
• Take Back Your Power
• Smart Grid Awareness
• Smart Meter Education Network in Michigan, USA

Update: SEMCO Smart Meters

It took some time, but finally got some information back from David Williams, the Regional Operation Manager at SEMCO Energy, our natural gas provider, regarding the new meters they installed here late last year.  This is the email we received on September 8, 2015, from David:

Here is some information I have on the type of automated device that Semco uses to collect meter reads. The device we use is a 100 series ERT that only transmits in very short pulses of 5.86 milliseconds for a total of about 1.5 minutes per day. I would be happy to bring one out to show you. We have had these installed in the Battle Creek area since 1996-97. The original devices were called a 40 series vs the newer 100 series we install today. 

 David Williams
Regional Operation Manager
SEMCO ENERGY Gas Company
269-660-5501

I did the math, which is taking the 1.5 minutes per day total and dividing that by 5.86 milliseconds.  Spread out over 24-hours, what you get is 10.67 pulses at 5.86 millisecond each of man-made microwave radio frequency radiation per minute.  Then I responded:  

Thank you, David, I thought you had forgotten about me!  

Thank you for the information.  No wonder!  It totally explains why my symptoms returned.  With 10.67 pulses per minute, I'm being zapped continuously day and night.  And the fact that they are short pulses, explains why it took about 6 months for my symptoms to return.  

NO, absolutely do NOT bring any more of those "devices" on this property!  Two were installed over 6 months ago, and the installers gave us misinformation, just like you did.  They and you said these meters were only "woken-up" once a month, when the meter-reader came by, which is not correct.  They send pulses all day long, 24 hours a day, in mini bursts, that disrupts my biology enough to cause adverse health symptoms.  

I'm one of those people who can feel them.  They are calling us "the canaries in the coal mine."  Coal miners used to bring canaries into the mines with them because of the delicate nature of the bird, the canary would succumb to deadly yet undetectable gases before the miners would.  They were an early warning sign of trouble. 

I am hypersensitive to radio frequencies, they cause me pain and other neurological disruptions.  SEMCO's new meters are causing me pain and must be removed.  We demand that you/SEMCO remove the two meters that were installed on our property under false pretenses, and replace them with 100% analog meters.  

And regarding the information from the manufacturer that you sent.  It holds no weight, because it's from the manufacturer. 

The fact is that there are no independent, third-party, long-term tests done on these automated devices that PROVE they are safe, while more and more people, every day, are beginning to experience adverse effects from them, and more and more scientists and medical doctors are attesting to the ADVERSE biological and health effects from wireless devices such as the new utility meters. 

The fact is that there is an appeal in front of the World Health Organization, signed by over 200 scientists, based upon over 2,000 peer-reviewed and published studies.  The Appeal asks the WHO to reevaluate the guidelines based upon the over 2,000 studies that show adverse biological and health effects.  https://www.emfscientist.org/ 

There's also the BioInitiative 2012 Report, published by 29 authors, MDs, PhDs, and other professionals, that conclude that "bioeffects are clearly established."  http://www.bioinitiative.org/  

I'm sure there are more studies and reports out there about the adverse health effects wireless devices like your new meters have on the human body, not to mention other animals, the birds, and the bees, if you want to keep digging.  There's several interesting talks Dr. George L. Carlo gives about the studies he was head of, that clearly proved adverse health effects from wireless devices, and what happened to him after he started reporting these findings.  The wireless industry has tried to discredit him for obvious reasons.  

Plus the fact that the new chairman of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, has been active in the wireless industry since the 1970's, and now he's in a position to regulate the very industry that has been his bread and butter for over 40 years, explains why the FCC refuses to reevaluate their standards and guidelines.  That's what's called the fox guarding the hen house.  Good for the fox.  Not so good for the hens.  

SEMCO has 30 days, until October 9, 2015, to remove the two "automated" devices they installed here under false pretenses, and replace them with 100% analog meters, because the automated devices are making me ill.  If SEMCO does not comply, we will arrange to have the devices removed and replaced ourselves.  We appreciate your cooperation.  

This is a legal notice.  Notice to principal is notice to agent and notice to agent is notice to principal.  All rights reserved.

It's really interesting, because I get the feeling that David Williams really did not know about the health effects people are having from these new smart meters, nor how they actually pulse all day long.

I haven't heard back from him yet, but will update when I do.

Bless Us All!

[March 11, 2016 Update]:

• SEMCO Energy states they have no opt-out.  
• The Michigan Public Service Commission has been of no help.
• The Better Business Bureau has been of no help.  
• We wrapped the meters in lead sheeting (though I've heard that aluminum works just as well).
• I turn all the electric breakers off at night except for the furnace.  
• These measures have helped tremendously, and most of my severe 'symptoms' have subsided, though, the City of Battle Creek is planning on installing 24 new antennas this summer.

If you want to do something about this situation regarding smart meters, talk to your local government about a no-fee smart meter opt-out with the choice to keep the old, safe and reliable analog meters.

If you live in Michigan, please read this about Utility Meter Choice Legislation, House Bill 4916.

For more information:

• PubMed: Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity - an increasing challenge to the medical profession
• Pathophysiology Journal: Electromagnetic Fields Stress Living Cells
• PubMed: The microwave syndrome - or electro-hypersensitivityhistorical background
• Electromagnetic Radiation Safety: Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity
• Economic Times Healthworld: Electromagnetic Radiation "Wake-Up Call" For Everyone 
• Cellular Phone Task Force - Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)
• EM Watch: EMF Pollution
• Is Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Real?  (YouTube)
• Care2: What is Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity?
• A Personal Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) case study
• Comments on the Draft Report by the California Council on Science and Technology "Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters"
• How Smart Meters Affect Your Body (YouTube)
• Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt - Smart Meters and EMR Health: The Health Crisis of Our Time
• Isn't the FCC protecting us?  (Cell tower attorneys explain)
• An Expose of the FCC: An Agency Captured by the Industries it Regulates 

Thank you for reading ~ Bless Us All!

Misleading Newsletter

"Battle Creek Current" is the name of the City of Battle Creek's community bi-monthly newsletter.  You can see it here.  

In the August 2015 issue, the newsletter announces that Consumers Energy is beginning meter changes for gas and electric customers this summer and in 2016, in Battle Creek and surrounding areas.

The article calls these new meters "upgraded electric meters," that will give the company daily meter reads through the cellular telephone network.

Nowhere in the article do they call these new meters:

Smart

or

Wireless

or

Radio frequency devices.

But they are.

Of course, that could just be an oversight.  An "oops!"  However...

Smart, wireless, radio frequency devices cause ill effects on 3% to 5% of the population.

Why would numerous cities and counties in California, the state known to be a forerunner when it comes to decisions for the health and safety of their citizens, be banning these devices, or putting a moratorium on their installation, if they were so safe and benign?  

Officials of the City of Battle Creek, please feel free to comment.

May You Be Blessed!

Dear Vice Mayor Gray

The Vice Mayor of Battle Creek questioned my concerns about smart meter/radio transmitting devices, and here is my email response to her:

Dear Vice Mayor Gray,

Towards the end of the August 4, 2015 City Commission meeting, in regards to my concern about smart meter/radio transmitting devices, you said something like, "We had an extensive explanation of that in the past."  Perhaps you were referring to the two documents that I was referring to in my public comments, when I said that when the Water Department is questioned about their safety, they send out two documents from the manufacturer which state that these devices are safe.  And I said, of course the manufacturer is going to tell you they are safe; they want to sell you their product.  The manufacturer's documents hold no weight with me.  Independent third party testing is required.  And from my research, there is none that prove that these devices are safe.

I personally have adverse reactions from smart meters and most, if not all, radio transmitting devices, and I know of another resident who had a debilitating reaction from a smart meter, and she didn't even know what a smart meter was, nor that one had been installed on her home.  Her reaction was more of a "typical" reaction and the health professional asked her if she had a smart meter.  I went to her house on Monday and verified that indeed, she did.

The fact is, we really don't know if these smart meter/radio transmitting devices are safe, and preliminary results point to the opposite, except from the manufacturer; the manufacturer is telling us they are safe.  But thousands of people world-wide are telling us that they are getting ill from them.  Though it appears that those who are hypersensitive are the minority right now.

The following is a partial list of California counties and cities that have either called for a moratorium on smart meter installations, given customers the right to opt out, adopted an ordinance banning smart meters, requested more research on health and safety impacts, and/or who are otherwise opposing smart meters...

The County Board of Supervisors of the following counties:

Humboldt - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/CPUC-Letter.pdf
Lake*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Lake-County-Smart-Meter-Moratorium-Ordinance.pdf
Marin*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/marin-urgency-moratorium-adopted-1-4-11.pdf
Mendocino*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Mendocino.pdf
Monterey - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Monterey-County.pdf
San Louis Obispo - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/SLO-BOS-on-SM-3.8.11.pdf
San Francisco - http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/efile/PM/119424.pdf
Santa Cruz*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Santa-Cruz-ordinance-and-packet-1-11-11.pdf
Santa Barbara
Sonoma - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Sonoma-County-AB-37-Support-Letter.pdf
Tehama - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Tehama-County.pdf
Ventura - http://www.vcstar.com/news/supervisors-push-for-revising-opt-out-program

And the cities of:

Arcata - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Arcata.SmartMeter.Letter.1.6.2011.pdf
Belvedere - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Belvedere.pdf
Berkeley - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/BerkeleySmartMeterLetter2010.pdf
Blue Lake
Bolinas
Calabasas
Capitola - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/952-Capitola-SmartMeter-Moratorium-Urgency_Ord.pdf
Clearlake
Cotati - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Cotatismartmeters.cpuc.20100330.pdf
Fairfax - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Ordinance-752-Urgency-Ord-banning-Smart-Meters.pdf
Fort Bragg - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Fort-Bragg-2011-05-09-SmartMeters-CPUC.pdf
Goleta - http://www.independent.com/news/2012/feb/23/smart-meters-rile-goleta-residents/#commenttoggle
Grover Beach - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Grover-Beach-Ltr_CPUC-SmartMeters_04-19-11.pdf
Lake Port*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Lakeport-Smartmeter-Moritorium-Resolution.pdf
Marina - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Marina.pdf
Mill Valley - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Mill-Valley-SmartMeter-Letter-MV-Council-to-CPUC.pdf
Monte Sereno - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Monte-Sereno.pdf
Monterey - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Monterey-.pdf
Morro Bay - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Morro-Bay-Resolution-63-10-1.pdf
Mount Shasta
Novato - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Novato-SmartMeters-ltr-to-CPUC-FINAL-08-26-10.pdf
Ojai*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Ojai-Ordinance-823-Smart-Meters.pdf
Pacific Grove
Palo Alto
Piedmont
Richmond
Rio Dell*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Rio-Dell-Ordinance.pdf
Ross
San Anselmo - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/San-Anselmo-Letter-to-CPUC-Jan-2011.pdf
San Louis Obispo - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/San-Luis-Obispo-letter-to-CPUC.pdf
San Rafael - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/SanRafael.pdf
Santa Barbara
Santa Cruz - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Santa-Cruz-County-034-1.pdf
Sausalito
Scotts Valley
Sea Side*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Seaside-SmartMeters.pdf
Sebastopol***(ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/DRAFT-Smart-Meter-Moratorium-Ordinance-For-2-21-2013-.pdf
Simi Valley
Solvang
Thousand Oaks - http://www.toaks.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=23166
Watsonville*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Watsonvill-Ordinance.pdf
Willitis - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Willits-Resolution-2011-06-SmartMeters.pdf
The Big Valley Band of Pomo Indians*** (ban or moratorium on smart meters) - http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Big-Valley-Band-of-Pomo-Indians.pdf

So you see, we're not talking small potatoes here!  There's a lot of people on the smart-meter-free bandwagon.  Unfortunately, it appears that because we're still a minority, we're not always taken seriously.  That's why those like me, hypersensitive to radio frequencies, may be akin to the proverbial canary in the coal mine; an early warning sign.

Smart meter/radio transmitting devices adversely affect me and others, and we have a right to not be harmed by utility company's equipment.

Thank you for your concern about this issue.  I look forward to hearing back from you regarding the information I have presented.

May you be blessed!

Jeanine Deal

P.S. - I've attached the two documents I was referring to, from the manufacturer of the smart meter/radio transmitting devices, that the Water Department sends out when someone questions the safety, that hold no weight because they are manufacturer documents.  If they are not what you were referring to, please let me know.  Thank you!  

(End of email)

Then, I found another credible source, and sent that to her as well:

Dear Vice Mayor Gray,

I'm sorry if I am overwhelming you with information, but I just found another credible source warning us about smart meter/radio transmitting devices, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine:  https://www.aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.php

Furthermore, the AAEM asks for:

• An immediate caution on Smart Meter installation due to potentially harmful RF exposure.
• Accommodation for health considerations regarding EMF and RF exposure, including exposure to wireless Smart Meter technology.
• Independent studies to further understand the health effects from EMF and RF exposure.
• Recognition that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a growing problem worldwide.
• Understanding and control of this electrical environmental bombardment for the protection of society.
• Consideration and independent research regarding the quantum effects of EMF and RF on human health.
• Use of safer technology, including for Smart Meters, such as hard-wiring, fiber optics or other non-harmful methods of data transmission.

Submitted by: Amy L. Dean, DO, William J. Rea, MD, Cyril W. Smith, PhD, Alvis L. Barrier, MD 

(End of that email)

I did heard back from Vice Mayor Gray, and wrote about it here.  

We've also heard back from Perry Hart, Utility Administrator at the City of Battle Creek Water Department, who had written to us on July 31, 2015:  "Please let me know if we need to remove the existing devices or if this action can be delayed until a policy is developed."  

We responded the same day:  "...please remove all of the Water Department's radio devices from my property as soon as possible."

October 3, 2015 Update:  

Here is Utility Administrator Parry Hart response on August 18, 2015:

The City is considering the development of an opt-out process to accommodate your request to have the current read device removed. Until that process is developed and implemented, providing the Water Division direction on how to uniformly proceed with an opt-out option, we are not able to take action at this time. Thank you for bringing your concerns to the City and for your patience in this request.

(End of that email)

The City of Battle Creek Water Department has not yet removed their radio transmitting devices from the property, and today, October 3, 2015,  it's been over two months since we first requested their removal.  We have emailed them a few times since August 18, 2015, and a few of the city government employees have read the emails (read-receipt returned), but no one has responded... yet. 

May We All Be Blessed!

*

Canary In The Coal Mine

1. 

Domestic canaries have long been known as an animal sentinel for men who worked in coal mines.  Before coal miners started bringing canaries into coal mines with them, miners would occasionally succumb to undetectable toxic gases that filled up the coal mine shaft, with no one aware of what was happening.

In the early 1900's, a man named John Scott Haldane, a Scottish physiologist, first proposed bringing canaries, or other warm blooded animals, into coal mines to act as an early warning sign.  Canaries, being delicate and sensitive creatures, would show the effects of breathing toxic gases before human beings, and helped save the lives of countless coal miners who took heed of the early warning sign the canary gave with it's life.

Now the term "canary in the coal mine," is being used in reference to people like me, who are hypersensitive to radio frequencies.  Are we really the early warning sign that something is amiss?  An estimated 3% to 10% of the population are hypersensitive to radio frequencies, and experience mild to debilitating reactions.  I've also heard that approximately 35% of the population experience some type of effects, though most don't even realize it.

A few months ago, I became extremely concerned when I learned that the Commissioners of the City of Battle Creek had approved the installation of smart meter/radio transmitting devices by the Water Department, and immediately emailed the Commissioners about my concerns.  That didn't get me very far.  They sent me two documents from the manufacturer, stating that these devices were safe.  Of course the manufacturer is going to tell us that they are safe.  I'm looking for independent third-party long-term, peer-reviewed studies, and I don't think they exist.

Having reached a dead end with my initial contact with the City of Battle Creek's Commissioner Helmboldt and City Manager Fleury, I then started making comments during the Battle Creek City Commission meetings, in hopes of educating the Commissioners about these devices.  It is my desire that the Commissioners of Battle Creek reconsider their decision to allow the installations of these smart meter/radio transmitting devices that cause harm to some, if not ALL people, not to mention the birds, bees, and other forms of life.  

We ALL have a right to not be harmed by utility company's equipment.

In California, the state known for being the first in many health and safety related decisions, dozens of cities and counties have either banned smart meters, or have put a moratorium on their installation, citing, among other things, possible health risks.  I've also learned that over 30 municipalities in Michigan (where I'm at) have passed resolutions against smart meters due to concerns about safety, security, and health affects.  

The first two posts of my "smart-meter-saga" are on my other blog:
Smart-Meter-Free, Please
Smart Meter - Radio Transmitting Devices

However, I will continue posting my smart meter saga here, until it becomes no longer necessary, or I move to California, or New Mexico, or...

Thank you for reading ~ May We All Be Blessed!