1) A long (29 pages) but very interesting rejection of an application for a $meter program in Massachusetts in Jan. 2014, after much consideration and due diligence that seems no one at BC Hydro or this government did. Even if you skim and read the highlighted sections, you will note the many problems identified and reasons why $meters are not necessary to achieve goals of energy savings, and why money could be better spent on infrastructure upgrades.
Below is a link to a packet submitted on behalf of NSTAR Electric Company (“NSTAR Electric”), and Western Massachusetts Electric Company (“WMECO”)(collectively, “Northeast Utilities” or the “Companies”) in response to the straw proposal issued by the Department of Public Utilities (the “Department”) in relation to the modernization of the electric distribution grid in Massachusetts via the use of smart meters.
2) Media silence on the dangers of RF and $meters won a “media blackout award” presented by a couple of California universities. The silence is deafening and deliberate to ensure we know nothing about the dangers of wireless devices in general and of $$meters specifically.
3) Major support for firefighters in LA. See letter of support (below) from Dr. Magda Havas.
http://www.latimes.com/local/countygovernment/la-me-disaster-radios-20150324-story.html
4) Good news from Susan Foster in California, who has devoted much time and energy fighting for the firefighters to have a safe station in which to sleep and live while working.
There is no corresponding news story yet, though here is one from 12 hours earlier that will bring people up to date. Construction has been halted on the 7-storey cell towers that were being built on more than 200 fire stations and police stations in Los Angeles. Cindy Sage argued for the firefighters and deserves our gratitude and admiration, and the same sentiment goes to Lew Currier, Head of Health and Safety of the Los Angeles County Firefighters Local 1014.
This FirstNet program is slated to go in most cities in the US, and it had to be halted in Los Angeles, one of the first cities where construction has already started. These firefighters have set a precedent for the rest of the country. Thank you, Cindy Sage. There is more work to be done, but this is a significant victory for the firefighters and for the residents of Los Angeles. Thank you so much to all who signed the petition and wrote letters to the LA County Board of Supervisors.
5) A report calling for a reclassification of RF radiation as a 2a (potential) carcinogen. Here is the abstract:
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/ijo/46/5/1865
The entire report is available by clicking on “download pdf” on the right-hand side.
*****************************************************
Letters:
From Dr. Magda Havas re. LA Firefighters fight to prevent cell towers from being put on fire stations:
From: Magda Havas [mailto:drmagdahavas@gmail.com]
Sent: March 23, 2015 8:18 PM
To: FirstDistrict@bos.lacounty.gov; MarkRidleyThomas@bos.lacounty.gov; Sheila@bos.lacounty.gov; Don@bos.lacounty.gov; FifthDistrict@lacbos.org
Subject: Urgent: Regarding construction” of LA-RICs cell towers – Expert Testimony
To whom it may concern,
I am a university professor and research scientist who was involved with Resolution 15, passed by the IAFF at their August 2004 meeting held in Boston. I also presented on this topic at the IAFF health and safety conference in Hawaii held in 2005.
Resolution 15: The IAFF oppose the use of fire stations as base stations for antennas and towers for the conduction of cell phone transmissions until such installations are proven not to be hazardous to the health of our members.
Below is information pertaining to that meeting written by Susan Foster Ambrose and my abstract for the Conference in Hawaii.
It is imperative that fire fighters NOT be exposed to radio frequency radiation generated by cell phone antennas on fireballs. I measured levels in firehalls in British Columbia and they are elevated on the top floor where the fire fighters spend most of their time. This radiation, even below federal guidelines is NOT SAFE! Fire fighters who have cell towers on their fire halls told us they experience vertigo and dizziness and brain fog and that they are afraid to share this information because they will be fired from their jobs. The microwaves generated by these antennas can cause the symptoms mentioned above.
Those who care about the health and welfare of our first responders and the job they need to perform would not force them to be exposed 24/7 to microwave radiation!
Please contact me if you require any more information.
Sincerely,
Magda Havas
____________________________
Dr. Magda Havas, BSc, PhD
Environmental & Resource Studies,
Trent University,
Peterborough, ON, K9J 7B8, Canada
phone: 1-705-748-1011 ext 7882
fax: 1-705-748-1569
email: mhavas@trentu.ca
email: drmagdahavas@gmail.com
website: www.magdahavas.com
____________________________
See this link: http://www.iaff.org/Events/convention/081704Reso.aspx and see Resolution 15, August 2004 meeting in Boston.
**********
Article by Susan Foster Ambrose
Contact:
Susan Foster Ambrose, M.S.W., Medical Writer
P.O. Box 3605
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
858.756.3532
sfambrose@cox.net
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS (IAFF) VOTES TO STUDY HEALTH EFFECTS OF CELL TOWERS ON FIRE STATIONS
Call for Moratorium on New Cell Towers on Fire Stations Until Health Effects Can Be Studied
Boston, MA – August 24, 2004 – Firefighters returned to their home stations throughout the United States and Canada following last week’s IAFF convention after passing a resolution to study the health effects of cell towers placed on the fire stations where they work and live.
Added to the resolution was an amendment calling for the IAFF to support a moratorium on the placement of new cell towers on fire stations until the completion of the study.
In many parts of the U.S. and Canada, the wireless industry has sought to place cell towers on fire stations because of their strategic locations. Fire stations tend to be located in densely populated areas, many of them near main highways, making them attractive locations for cell towers to maximize coverage. The wireless industry is not alone in the benefits of placing cell towers on these stations. Municipalities receive revenue from the wireless companies in exchange for locating the antennas on fire station property.
Lt. Ron Cronin of the Brookline, MA Fire Department and Acting Lt. Joe Foster of the Vancouver Fire Department and Vice President of Vancouver, B.C. Local #18 spearheaded the passage of the resolution.
“Some firefighters with cell towers currently located on their stations are experiencing symptoms that put our first responders at risk. It is important to be sure we understand what effects these towers may have on the firefighters living in these stations,” Cronin explained. “If the jakes in the fire house are suffering from headaches, can’t respond quickly and their ability to make decisions is clouded by a sort of brain fog, then entire communities they are protecting will clearly be at risk. No one wants the guys responding to their family emergency to be functioning at anything less than 100 percent capacity.”
A recent pilot study of six California firefighters, first publicly revealed at the IAFF convention by medical writer and study organizer Susan Foster Ambrose of San Diego, CA, raises concern about the safety of fire fighters working and sleeping in stations with towers.
The study, conducted by Dr. Gunnar Heuser of Agoura Hills, CA, focused on neurological symptoms of six firefighters who had been working for up to five years in stations with cell towers. Those symptoms included slowed reaction time, lack of focus, lack of impulse control, severe headaches, anesthesia-like sleep, sleep deprivation, depression, and tremors.
Dr. Heuser, along with Dr. J. Michael Uszler of Santa Monica, CA, used functional brain scans – SPECT scans – to assess any changes in the brains of the six firefighters as compared to healthy brains of men of the same age. Computerized psychological testing known as TOVA was used to study reaction time, impulse control, and attention span.
Disturbingly, the SPECT scans revealed a pattern of abnormal change which was concentrated over a wider area than would normally be seen in brains of individuals exposed to toxic inhalation, as might be expected from fighting fires. Dr. Heuser indicated the only plausible explanation at this time would be RF radiation exposure. Additionally, the TOVA testing revealed among the six firefighters delayed reaction time, lack of impulse control, and difficulty in maintaining mental focus.
Because of increasing complaints among firefighters with cellular antennas on their stations coupled with the California study showing damage among the six firefighters tested, a group of five individuals spread across two provinces and three states worked with Southern California firefighters to draft the resolution put before the IAFF membership last week. Lt. Ron Cronin and Acting Lt. Joe Foster were joined by Dr. Magda Havas of Trent University in Peterborough, Ontario, Vermont-based Janet Newton – president of the EMR Policy Institute, and Susan Foster Ambrose.
“It is imperative to understand that in spite of the build out of an extensive wireless infrastructure in the U.S. and Canada,” explained Ambrose, “we have no safety standards for cell towers. There are only regulatory standards, not proven safety standards. The Heuser Study in California calls into question whether or not we are sacrificing the health and well being of our countries’ first responders for the convenience of a technology we’ve come to rely upon.”
Considering approximately 80 percent of the firefighters attending last week’s convention voted in favor of a medical study with the spirit of a cell tower moratorium attached, it appears firefighters throughout the U.S. and Canada share that concern.
This study has far-reaching public health implications in view of the fact that the wireless industry pays local governments to place cell towers, not only on fire stations, but also on top of schools and municipal buildings.
For more information contact:
Susan Foster Ambrose: 858.756.3532; sfambrose@cox.net
Lt. Ron Cronin: 617.212.5670; ron.cronin@verizon.net
Acting Lt. Joe Foster: 604.250.5727; joe@iaff18.org
Magda Havas, Ph.D.: 705.748.1011 x 7882; mhavas@trentu.ca,
Janet Newton: 802.426.3035; JNewton@emrpolicy.org
Gunnar Heuser, M.D., Ph.D., F.A.C.P.: 818.865.1858; www.toxgun.com
J. Michael Uszler, M.D.: 310.264.0080; www.santamonicaimaging.com
***************
My Abstract for IAFF Health and Safety conference in Hawaii is below:
Working, living near cell phone towers . . . not a good idea.
Magda Havas, B.Sc., Ph.D.
Environmental & Resource Studies, Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Canada, K9J 7B8, mhavas@trentu.ca
Radio frequency radiation (RFR), associated with our growing dependence on wireless telecommunication technology, is inundating the planet at intensities and frequencies that are unnatural. Current scientific thinking states that this form of energy is safe provided it is below international safety guidelines that were designed for thermal effects.
However, studies from industrial countries seem to contradict this assertion. As a consequence, some countries have set guidelines below those recommended by ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection). People who live near cell phone antennas or TV and radio broadcast antennas, which have emissions well below international guidelines, have a greater risk of developing and dying from different forms of cancer and of having symptoms associated with electrical hypersensitivity (EHS), previously referred to as radio-wave sickness. These symptoms include headaches, depression, sleeping disorders, fatigue, neurological disorders, cognitive dysfunction, tinnitus, vertigo etc. EHS seems to be increasing and estimates of its prevalence range from 2% to 35%. Scientific research is providing the early warnings about RFR just as it did with chemical contaminants such as asbestos, lead, benzene, PCBs, and PVCs. Since we are unlikely to eliminate RFR we need to ensure proper siting of antennas, design antennas that minimize exposure of the population, and shield or filter this radiation where no other precautionary approach is possible. Lack of scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse for inaction. Applying the precautionary principle is highly recommended.
*************** <<…>>
You have remarkable knowlwdge in this case.