1) Microwave News reports that the NTP’s 2 year study on effects of cell phone microwave radiation on DNA has been completed and published. So far, only the abstract is available to the general public. This is the same type of radiation to which children are being exposed at schools all day from wireless devices they are allowed to bring to school (e.g. cell phones, tablets) and that is emitted by wifi modems and routers, and by smeters, cordless phones, cordless baby monitors, etc.
Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure
“DNA damage was assessed in cells from three brain regions, liver cells, and peripheral blood leukocytes; using the micronucleus assay, chromosomal damage was assessed in immature and mature peripheral blood erythrocytes. Results of the comet assay showed significant increases in DNA damage in the frontal cortex of male mice (both modulations), leukocytes of female mice (CDMA only), and hippocampus of male rats (CDMA only). Increases in DNA damage judged to be equivocal were observed in several other tissues of rats and mice…. In conclusion, these results suggest that exposure to RFR is associated with an increase in DNA damage.“
Microwave News newsletter with links to earlier articles re. NTP studies:
2) Decades ago, the dangers associated with exposure to non-thermal radiation was known, and concerns were raised by agencies in various countries and, even, the WHO. Here is a report from the WHO published in 1981. I’ve read only the first dozen pages out of 139. How is it that as early as 1971 the WHO recommended that the hazards from microwave radiation should be a priority in protecting the public, and now it, ICNIRP, Health Canada, etc. can say there is no evidence of harm? There is even concern about exposures to milliwaves in the ranges expected to be used by 5G.
(click on photo to enlarge)
RADIOFREQUENCY AND MICROWAVES
Published under the joint sponsorship of the United Nations Environment Programme, the World Health Organization and the International Radiation Protection Association
“In November 1971, the WHO Regional Office for Europe convened a Working Group meeting in The Hague which recommended, inter alia, that the protection of man from microwave radiation hazards should be considered a priority activity in the field of non-ionizing radiation protection.” (pg. 8) [10 of 139]
“It has been demonstrated that low-level, long-term exposure may induce effects in the nervous, haematopoietic, and immunocompetent cell systems of animals. Such effects have been reported in small animals (rodents) exposed to incident power density levels as low as 0.1-1.0 mW/cm2. The reported effects on the nervous system include behavioural, bioelectrical, metabolic, and structural (at the cellular and subcellular levels) changes. Erythrocyte production and haemaglobin synthesis may be impaired and immunological reactivity changed. All these effects may influence the susceptibility of animals to other environmental factors.” (pg. 12) [14 of 139]
“Effects of millimetre waves (35 and 107 GHz) at power densities ranging from 5 to 60 mW/cm2 for 15 min-1 h were investigated in rabbit eyes by Rosenthal et al. (1976). Corneal damage and epithelial and stromal injury were observed. Stromal injury appeared at lower power densities (5 mW/cm2) at a frequency of 107 GHz than at 35 GHz, but it was concluded that keratitis (inflammation of the cornea) was a useful criterion for ocular response to millimetre radiation. Keratitis occurred at lower power densities than those required to produce other ocular effects such as iritis or lenticular injury. The recovery rate from stromal injury depended on the frequency of the radiation and was faster after exposure to 107 GHz.” (pg. 57) [59 of 139]
“7.4 Nervous System and Behavioural Effects
Microwave radiation effects on the central nervous system and behaviour have been the subject of most controversy in the whole field of bioeffects. Czechoslovak, Polish, and Soviet investigations on this subject commenced in the early fifties and have been the source of most of the reports on the effects of microwaves on man. Animal studies and clinical and industrial surveys in Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the USSR have been summarized by Marha et al. (1971), Baranski & Czerski (1976), and Presman (1968), respectively. The basic assertion is that exposure to microwaves at low power densities results in neurasthenic disorders in man. Subjective comp1aints such as headache, fatigue, weakness, dizziness, moodiness, confusion, and nocturnal insommia have been reported.” (pg. 62) [64 of 139]
3) 6 links to help you find your electric utility‘s opt-out program plus comparison chart of opt-out fees for BC, Canada and the US utilities.
From: Petrina Gregson (name given with permission)
Sent: October 21, 2019
Subject: BC Hydro forcing smart meters
We, too, were forced to accept a smart meter, after going great lengths (even moving) to avoid one. We moved to a more remote area away from cell towers and locked up the analogue, sent registered letters to BC Hydro, posted signs, paid the extortion fees to avoid the smart meters . . . and after a few years of paying regularly, were told our analogue meter’s seal had expired. I asked them to test our meter, but they refused, saying they tested a few from that date, and if any failed the test, they pulled all of the meters of that date. I was told there were no more analogue meters to replace the one they were taking. I asked if I could buy my own meter, knowing they were available in the USA, but was told they wouldn’t accept that. My ‘choice’ was to accept a smart meter or have our power cut off. I finally capitulated under this threat but required 24 hours notice so I could be home to shut off the main switch on exchange, to protect the expensive electrical appliances. This was agreed upon. However, one day an electrician arrived without any notice just as I was leaving my driveway to a doctor’s appointment. I told him I didn’t have time to unlock my analog, and that I had been promised 24 hours notice. He had not been informed of that. I was charged $65 by BC Hydro for “installation failure.” After some dialogue with BC Hydro, they agreed to credit the fine upon installation of a smart meter: my ‘choice’ now was signal on or off. Anticipating further broken promises, I chose “signal off”. When the installers came, I recorded the procedure with my camera; “How do I know this is ‘signal off'”, I inquired.
“Signal off?! You wanted “Signal off?!” I was annoyed, frustrated; after all the dialogue, e-mails, etc, and they still didn’t get it. These installers hadn’t read the written order. They removed the meter, drove 25 km to Clearwater and returned with another meter. Again, I shut off my power and recorded their 2nd installation. Neither they nor I could see an indication that this meter was ‘signal off’. Another trip to Clearwater; they returned and together we deciphered the digital code that indicated ‘signal off’. Now I only had to pay $20 a month for this ‘privilege’ and the dirty electricity that smart meters bring into the house. All that money — close to $2000 — to keep my analogue, only to have it taken — with no refund.
The $20 monthly “to read the meter” is a lie, as there are several smart meters in the neighbourhood now, all having to be manually read since we are out of cell tower range (thankfully) and these residents are not being charged a meter-reading fee. It is a penalty fee for not kow-towing to BC Hydro’s master plan. Many states in the USA are allowed to opt out and keep their analogs; some states even allow the smart meters to be removed and have analogues replace them. Not BC. Our bully of a monopoly, BC Hydro, forces smart meters on the aged, the infirm, the electrohypersensitive, those with a doctor’s certificate; they have been known to cut power off in the middle of winter, causing pipes to burst. (I can provide identity.) What kind of a democracy do we live in? Obviously, I didn’t move far enough away.
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“But what we need above all is critical citizens, who can spot the difference between technical progress and consumer foolishness: citizens who, as both voters and consumers, remember that democracy once meant rule of the people, not ruling the people.” Dr. Karl Hecht