2015-04-11 California Med. Association asks for RF safety standards to be re-evaluated

1)  In December, 2014 the California Medical Association passed a resolution asking for the wireless communications safety standards to be re-evaluated based upon the increasing evidence of harm:


Resolved 1 That CMA supports efforts to reevaluate microwave safety exposure levels associated with wireless communication devices, including consideration of adverse non-thermal biologic and health effects from non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation used in wireless communications; and be it further

Resolved 2 That CMA support efforts to implement new safety exposure limits for wireless devices to levels that do not cause human or environmental harm based on scientific research



2)  Canadian, Radio- Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) will be reviewing needs for increased internet access across Canada. This could lead to more wireless transmitters. If the Commission is in your area, or you have a chance for input about needs, push for more fiber optic cable. It is much more efficient, more secure and doesn’t require wireless transmitters that add RF to the environment.

In announcing the review Thursday, the CRTC also expressed concerns about the pressure being placed on existing services from emerging technologies, such as so-called smart meters used by municipal and provincial utilities to measure energy, water or natural gas consumption

CRTC kicks off examination Internet access across Canada by Christine Dobby – The  Globe and Mail – April 09, 2015:

3)  In Calif. $$mart water meters are being used to spy on usage so that those not following rules re. use of water can be penalized.  Remember when we were told that $mart meters can’t get detailed personal data??


“We are using it specifically for an enforcement tool to go after those customers who we’ve gotten lots of complaints about,” Wattier said.

Wattier says he believes the smart meter will be used in both businesses and homes to track water waste across Southern California.



4) A new report warns of effect of a cyberattack, and more attacks occur each day. Once the grid is all interconnected the result could be devastating:


Utilities hold and store valuable customer information, including financial information, usage data and physical information. Information systems have the ability to efficiently store this data and provide utilities the ability to offer innovative new services. However, they also create risk for ratepayers. The breach of a utility’s information technology systems, the standard networks used to complete business processes, could allow access to customer information, business practices or security information related to control systems. A utility operating these systems without consideration for cybersecurity exposes its ratepayers to dangerous cyberattacks, including identity theft and the compromise of privacy.


Cybersecurity Challenges for State Utility Regulators by Daniel Phelan – EnergyBiz Magazine Spring 2015:

5) What is the response to these warnings? Industry realizes that security is a major concern, but rather than address the issue by eliminating wireless smart meters, they advise promoting the benefits, e.g. remote control of system, as if not acknowledging the problem will make it go away.




About the hackable smart meters in Spain, but know that ITRON meters are vulnerable. Someone who remains anonymous told me that his teenage daughter used her cellphone to make the meter go backwards.  Someone else who is a HAM operator said he could adjust his radio signal’s power to get smart meters to stop. Imagine what someone who wants to really cause problems could do.




There has been discussion in the US about requiring all utilities to upgrade security to avoid major accidents or attacks. This will cost huge amounts – and Hydro/Fortis will have to comply because the grid is international. As with all computer systems, this will be ongoing. As we’ve seen, as soon as one “firewall” is created, the hackers find a way to breach it, and another is required. A bottomless pit, throwing good money after bad.




Please read from the bottom up – 3 letters from 3 different people re. Bill C 648

From: Dennis and Sharon Noble [mailto:dsnoble@shaw.ca]
Sent: April 10, 2015 11:59 PM
To: ‘edgar murdoch’; ‘CorrespondenceMinister@ic.gc.ca
Cc:una@citizensforsafetechnology.org‘; ‘stopsmartmetersbc@gmail.com‘; ‘director@stopsmartmetersBC.COM‘; ‘colin.mayes@parl.gc.ca
Subject: RE: Correspondence from the Minister of Industry

Dear Minister Moore,

If I may participate in this discussion, since I was copied, I would like to ask you a question. If you believe that the current guidelines are sufficient to protect Canadians, why would you object to and not support Bill C-648?

What we are asking is that the same information that companies are required to put in the manuals  regarding risks and manner of usage related to wireless products be put on a label where it would be more likely to be read. The Bill does not ask for wireless devices to be more tightly regulated, although independent scientists believe they should be. The Bill does not ask for any tightening of exposure limits although, even with the recent reductions, Safety Code 6 is one of the weakest guidelines in the world. Even China, Russia and India have limits that are far more protective.

Mr. Moore, I would like to know why you refuse to support Bill C 648. Would you be kind enough to answer this one question?

Thank you.


Sharon Noble
Victoria, BC


From: edgar murdoch [mailto:murdochedgar@hotmail.com]
Sent: April 10, 2015 8:58 AM
To: CorrespondenceMinister@ic.gc.ca
Cc: una@citizensforsafetechnology.org; dsnoble@shaw.ca; stopsmartmetersbc@gmail.com; director@stopsmartmetersBC.COM; colin.mayes@parl.gc.ca

RE: Correspondence from the Minister of Industry


Dear Jim,

Please understand and make a concentrated effort to inform the PMO and all parliamentarians that Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 and the “excellent safeguards for Canadians” as mentioned in your response below, are a huge joke among developed countries that are realizing that the effects of EMF/EMR & RFR are lethal and toxic to all living things on this endangered planet!! It is recognized that Safety Code 6 is up to 10,000 times less effective than similar codes in more advanced European countries.

The following is an excerpt from Frank Clegg’s report in the Hill Times:

“Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 governs the safety of cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, smart meters and all other devices that now permeate every Canadian home.
It impacts all of us, every day, and should protect us.
But Safety Code 6 has not been significantly updated since the 1970s, long before Wi-Fi was invented or cell phones were sold.”
Jim, this sentiment is echoed by world-class medical professionals and scientists universally who have independently reviewed the mountain of evidence against the proliferation of wireless technology available to those who ought to be concerned about the health and welfare of the citizens under their mandate. Apparently the latter does not yet include the Canadian government.

Even the wimpy World Health Organization has declared all wireless technology to be a Group 2B carcinogen, a likely cause of certain cancers.
The same scientists referred to above are adamant that the classification ought to be raised to a Group 2A category, a probable cause and even to Group 1, a definite carcinogenic to humans!

When are our legislators going to wake up and stop the madness by invoking the Precautionary Principle and rebuff the telecommunications deep pocket lobby groups?
Is profit & greed more important to the Canadian Government than the safety and security of its residents as per the Canadian Charter of Rights?
Maybe its intentions ought to be reviewed by those sitting in the House rather than those of the gluttonous telecom industry.

With diminishing respect,

Edgar Murdoch
Box 556, Enderby, BC  V0E 1V0


Subject: Correspondence from the Minister of Industry
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:34:07 -0400
From: CorrespondenceMinister@ic.gc.ca
To: murdochedgar@hotmail.com

Dear Mr. Murdoch:

Thank you for your email of February 15, 2015, requesting my support for Private Member’s Bill C‑648.  The Prime Minister’s Office has also forwarded to me your correspondence on this matter.  I appreciate your taking the time to write.

Canada’s safety guidelines for wireless devices are set by Health Canada in what is commonly called Safety Code 6.  Safety Code 6 establishes the safety parameters that limit the maximum amount of radiofrequency energy to which people can be exposed.  The precautionary limits in the Code work to keep frequency exposure far below the point at which a potential health effect could be measured.

To safely guard Canadians and ensure that wireless devices are safe for all who would use them, Industry Canada’s administration of the Radiocommunication Act, and the associated technical regulations, includes the exposure limits prescribed by Safety Code 6.  These regulations apply to all radio apparatus sold in Canada, including cell phones, Wi‑Fi equipment, home cordless phones, and all other wireless devices.  Industry Canada monitors and enforces compliance with its technical regulations, and any non‑compliance is dealt with immediately.

The Radiocommunication Act and related regulations also include labelling requirements that are monitored and enforced by Industry Canada.  Our government welcomes the opportunity to explore the provisions in Bill C-648 when the Bill returns to Parliament for debate.

I wish to assure you that our current regulatory framework, including strict market surveillance, audit and enforcement procedures, provides excellent safeguards for Canadians.  Information on the certification process, which ensures that radio equipment is safe, is available online

Please accept my best wishes. 

The Honourable James Moore, P.C., M.P.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Smart Meters, Cell Towers, Smart Phones, 5G and all things that radiate RF Radiation