1) Sad news – Human Rights case dismissed.
Our Human Rights case was dismissed by the Human Rights Tribunal. This was a class action on behalf of people with EHS, and whose doctors said that they should avoid RF and not have $$meters. Even though EHS is a recognized by the Human Rights Commission in Canada, the Americans with Disabilities in the US, and as a disability in other countries, the Tribunal chose not to accept evidence but rather to base its decision in large part on the evidence the BCUC accepted in the Fortis application.
Fortis BC paid a company (Exponent) to defend the $meter. Exponent is a “product defense company” and has defended some of the most dangerous products in the world – pesticides, agent orange, asbestos, etc and now microwave radiation. They buy scientists who will produce reports saying anything is safe. One of their people said that our bodies emit more radiation that does a smart meter and the BCUC accepted that while rejecting testimony from world renowned experts like Dr. Martin Blank, Dr. Isaac Jamieson and Dr. Meg Sears.
It’s a sad day when the government is allowed, by the Human Rights tribunal, to come between a patient and his physician, but this is what has happened. Here is the decision for you to read. This makes it more urgent for us to fight this re. fires, fee discrimination, and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
2) I had circulated this youtube several months ago, but I am sharing it again for all of the new members. It has a lot of good and interesting information about $meters.
3) Below is a letter to Andrew Weaver is a “scientist”, in the field of climate and he is the only MLA from the Green Party. See his response, in which he demonstrates that just because someone might be knowledgeable in one scientific field it cannot be assumed he is knowledgeable in others. He is lacking in education in the field of biological effects of radiation, and doesn’t even seem to be aware that he has been sent many studies on the topic. But worse, he is ignorant but because he is a “scientist” people will believe what he says, even though much of it is so wrong. I’ve highlighted some real gems. May I suggest if anyone is going to write to him, please copy all the people he copied, plus Elizabeth May at Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca
Sent: September 17, 2014 7:48 AM
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; Adrian Dix.MLA; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Health impacts of and protection from EMF.
Dear Mr. Weaver
Because you are a scientist and a Green MLA, I am disappointed by your lack of activism on the threat to human health and the environment (especially birds and bees) by EMF. Your were chair of the IPCC when it came forward with the ground breaking report on climate change for which the IPCC won a Nobel prize! The science is acknowledged by everyone except industry proponents and their lobbyists (including the current BC Liberal government IMHO). Why are you so silent on this issue? Did you abandon science when you entered politics?
Many have compared the threat to health and the cover up as analogous to the history of the tobacco “wars”. I think this is far worse because EMF is increasingly ubiquitous and one cannot avoid it as most people could avoid smoking.
The purpose of this email is to highlight an article that describes several countries which have moved to legislatively protect people sensitive to EMF – Israel estimates that as many as 8.5% of school children are affected by wi fi.
What does it take to get Canadian, especially BC, politicians to educate themselves on this topic and take remedial legislative action?
I will vote and work for the first party and/or candidate that acknowledges the science and moves to protect the citizens of BC.
From: “Weaver.MLA, Andrew” <Andrew.Weaver.MLA@leg.bc.ca>
Date: September 17, 2014 9:33:36 AM PDT (CA)
Cc: “Horgan.MLA, John” <John.Horgan.MLA@leg.bc.ca>, “Dix.MLA, Adrian” <Adrian.Dix.MLA@leg.bc.ca>, “Farnworth.MLA, Mike” <Mike.Farnworth.MLA@leg.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Health impacts of and protection from EMF.
Hello X (cc my fellow MLAs),
It is precisely because I am a scientist that I am unable to support the position you are advocating for. In science, one starts with hypotheses and then develops experiments to test those hypotheses. You are advocating for policy to be based on an untested hypothesis. I recognize that you will not like this answer and will offer me numerous blog sites as evidence. But as you know, blogs are opinion not science. In fact the preponderance of unscientific opinion on blog sites contributes to public misunderstanding of the causes and consequences of global warming, an area I have a fair amount of experience with.
There has been much research conducted on mobile phone use. As you probably know, mobile phones emit microwave radiation. But as noted by the World Health Organization:
“To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use”
and there are billions of users out there so there are a lot of data points.
Some have evoked the precautionary principle and recommended young adults not hold cell phones close to their heads for extended periods of time. That seems perfectly reasonable since cell phones are point source emitters of very small amounts of microwave radiation.
Smart meters emit insignificant amounts of microwave radiation. The intensity decays with the square of the distance and so it is completely harmless. Nevertheless I have always said people should have a right to determine what is attached to their home.
There is widespread public misunderstanding of what electromagnetic radiation actually is. Every single person, object and molecule emits electromagnetic radiation. You emit it; I emit it, my chair emits it. Electromagnetic radiation that is ionizing is known to be hazardous. This includes X rays, UV, gamma rays and so forth. In fact infrared radiation (which is what you and I largely radiate) is far more energetic than either microwave or radio wave radiation. Visible radiation is even more so.
Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, government should introduce policy to ensure no one goes outside or is exposed to visible light as there is a potential for adverse health effects.
So I am sorry, the science is very clear. If you can point me to published studies in reputable journals I would be happy to read them. But to develop policy based on a hypothesis would be irresponsible in my view.
With best wishes
Hydro continues to admit that the legacy fees are to pay for additional services. There are NO ADDITIONAL services that are being provided to those of us with “legacy” meters that are not being provided to many smart metered homes. Here is an email with comments in blue by a member, which was returned to the $$meter dept.
From: Smart Meters
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 12:54 PM
Subject: BC Hydro Meter Choices Program
BC Hydro acknowledges your September 3, 2014 email regarding BC Hydro’s metering options.
As communicated in BC Hydro’s August 29, 2014 email, the BC Hydro Electric Tariff governs the terms and conditions of our service. The Tariff is overseen by the British Columbia Utilities Commission (BCUC), and the Commission has approved BC Hydro’s recovery of the costs of providing alternatives to standard meters. The Meter Choices Program fees are part of the Tariff and BC Hydro is obliged to collect them. I believe I dealt with all that including BCUC and their alleged independence in my last email.
As with all services, and in fairness to all customers, it is important every customers maintains full payments of their BC Hydro bills. Please continue to pay your BC Hydro bill in full. Not that I believe anything you would say, but the fact that you are manually reading smart meters for free, but penalizing those who won’t consent to them seems to put paid to any allegations of fairness.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) is a regulatory authority that develops standards for bulk power system owners and operators in North America. Its primary concern is reliability across interconnected power systems. In 2009, the BCUC adopted NERC reliability standards as mandatory and enforceable in B.C. As a result, BC Hydro is obliged to meet the adopted NERC standards. You can find more information about NERC on its website nerc.com.
Well thanks, but I’m well aware of all that including a point you seemed to have missed, that someone seems to have given Nerc the right to subject our Crown Corporation to millions of dollars in fines should we choose not comply with orders from this private foreign corporation.
Some would call this quiet handing over control of British Columbian’s Crown Energy Corporation.. treason, breach of trust, or at least a betrayal of the public interest..
And for all I know Mr. Meter Deployment Manager, you could be another American import, like that overpaid American Gary Murphy who got all this bullshit rolling. And then scampered back home with his ill gotten gains, when the shit started to hit the fan.
So thanks for taking the time to tell me what I already know about Nerc , but the copied P.S. below is what I actually requested in my last email. Oh if it’s not obvious, “who was involved” refers to names of the BC Hydro and Liberal Government officials. That retired fraud cop might be interested.
P.S. I’ve recently received a communication that alleged BC Hydro has secretly and effectively given over the control of British Columbia’s Hydro resource to an American Corporation called NERC. North American Energy Reliability Corporation. Please send me details of who was involved in these agreements and please consider this to be a request made under the Freedom of Information legislation if need be.
For more information about the Smart Metering Program, please visit bchydro.com/smartmeters.
Meter Deployment Manager
BC Hydro Smart Metering Program