1) A presentation by Dr. Beverly Rubik, Biophysicist, in which she speaks of increasing numbers of people suffering EHS. I can tell you that I am getting emails from many members who are suffering these symptoms after a smeter has been put on their homes. The strong, short pulses that are unique to $$smeters seem to be the final straws for many people.
“What do cell phones, wireless internet, cordless phones, cell phone towers, “smart” meters, “smart” home appliances, and compact fluorescent lights have in common? They all emit radiofrequencies (RF) or create “dirty electricity.” Moreover, these devices are all around us and may be affecting our health in profound ways. With the proliferation of wireless technology and our increasing exposure to RF, people are experiencing greater stress and have headaches, fatigue, low energy, sleep disturbances, heart palpitations, and other symptoms often associated with chronic radiation sickness. A new syndrome–Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome–affects an estimated 25% of the population, with 3 to 6 % severely affected, according to the World Health Organization.”
2) Below (in Letters) is an update from the Save the Olympia Peninsula Group, fighting to prevent the US Navy from performing RF warfare over the waters and land in and near the Olympic Peninsula. After all these months and all of our letters, I have yet to see anything from any of the local, provincial or federal politicians about the travesty that will inevitably involve southern BC. If you want more information please go to their website:
www.savetheolympicpeninsula.org .
These people are asking for our help. Please send this to your MPs and MLAs. Asking why they are doing nothing to prevent the devastation of the environment and the threat to our health that this will cause.
A comment by Jerry Flynn is below, too. He will explain how very dangerous this would be, and remember that areas of Vancouver Island are just a few miles from the Olympic area.
3) A study from 3 years ago shows that exposure during the day to modulated signals at 900Mhz, the frequency used by $$meters, can affect neurological functions as well as sleep. Deep recuperative sleep is necessary for a strong immune system and allows the body to heal itself from the onslaught faced during the day. If you are unfortunate enough to have a smeter, Sleep as far away from it as possible.
“It has also been repeatedly reported that exposure to low-level microwaves produces alterations in the resting or sleep EEG signal and brain physiology [2], [3] and [4]. It has been demonstrated that exposure to pulse-modulated microwaves alters not only the EEG but also regional cerebral blood flow [5] and [6]. Furthermore, it has been reported that modulation is crucial for radiofrequency electromagnetic field-induced alterations in brain physiology [6]….
Sleep is one of the biological phenomena that can be affected by RF radiation exposure. Mann and Roschke [10] reported reduction in latency to sleep onset and the percentage of REM sleep due to exposure to GSM-like signals. Loughran et al. [11] reported a decrease in REM sleep latency after 30 min of 894.6 MHz radiation exposure.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090123212000343
4) Good points in a letter in a Kelowna paper. My guess is that the Telus fiber optics he’s talking about will include the “small cell transmitters” so that every home is Wi-Fried, without permission. Please consider commenting.
http://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/opinion/article_ce04d996-dce9-11e5-859f-27e1d9d69ac7.html
Letters:
The US Navy already has an area assigned at which they could conduct this $11.5-million EW exercise – but it is in Idaho, some 400 miles away. The EW units’ home base is on Whidbey Island. So, the USN is lying to the public for two main reasons: 1. to save fuel costs; and, 2. To avoid having to spend time away from home and family. LAZY! LIARS!
In typical fashion, the US Navy is lying when it says there are no conclusive studies available showing that non-thermal EMR – especially pulsed – causes harmful biological or health effects to humans, flora and fauna. To begin with, no one in that – or any other EW unit, in any military – would have any scientific expertise that would enable them to know what biological and/or health effects EMR their EW games might cause to any person or thing. They would not know any more than I did! They would not be told the truth! The Pentagon would not want their own EW forces to know this.
Secondly, as Paul Brodeur (celebrated author of “The Zapping of America”) explains so well in his most recent book: “Currents of Death” (a copy of which I have), the US Military has a history of deliberately lying to governments and the public in order to achieve their goal, whatever that is. The best, most recent example I can think of is the PAVE PAWS early warning radar systems which the USN installed on both the East and West coasts of America. Project Sanguine is another that comes to mind, but there are many examples. The best US scientists who can speak to this include: Dr. Ross Adey, Dr. Sam Milham, Dr. Robert O. Becker (deceased), Dr. Marino and others whose names escape me at this moment.
From the point of view of someone trying to visualize how an airborne EW exercise might actually proceed, one has to realize that EW planes (“Growlers”) attack in units of three: two planes would be jamming – not specific frequencies – but entire BANDS of frequencies! The third plane would be passive (‘listening’) across all RF and possibly ELF bands to detect ANY activity coming from the ‘enemy’ area. Whether the USN would use one or more ‘units’ of three Growlers would depend on the size of the enemy ‘target’ they visualized. Their attack would occur at altitudes as low as 1200 feet, probably at speeds of up to, say, 600 MPH. They’d start jamming some considerable distance seaward from the targeted enemy, say, probably at least 20-30 miles away. Even at an altitude of 1200 feet, their ‘horizon’ over the sea would be at least that far away. At that distance, were they to begin jamming, their battery (yes, battery) of multiple transmitters – regardless of how focused they might be – would purposely irradiate some considerable vector of the ‘target’ ahead (both horizontally and vertically). A one-mile swath horizontally would not surprise me. How far into the shore and beyond their radiation would be blanketed, one can only guess. It would depend on how far the Growlers continue flying over their target. Cripes at that height, at that speed, they could easily cover tens of miles if not 50 miles into the National Park and Forest! If I’m correct, that means that any and every living thing present within that entire vector would be irradiated. And I wouldn’t trust any military person who said their radiated power would be just the minimum to do the job. On the contrary, in any hostile military action, a military would use the absolute maximum available power available to irradiate (literally blast) any possible ‘hostile’ radar, radar-controlled weapons system and/or communications equipment that might be on the ground.
If I can be of any assistance to the folks in Washington State, Sharon, I will happily oblige. As you know, months ago, I wrote a letter on their behalf. But, like all of my letters, I received no reply.
I hope that helps a bit.
Jerry Flynn
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = =
– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSK-JcK1MTc
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
We need your help! The Navy’s first noise analysis of the jets using the Electronic Warfare Range (EWR) appeared in the Northwest Training and Testing Final Environmental Impact Statement (NWTT FEIS). Those actions deprived you of two opportunities to comment on the environmental impacts of the jets using the EWR – first at the scoping stage, and then at the draft environmental impact statement stage. However, it’s not too late to contribute. We ask that you review the Navy’s noise analysis and send us your comments at savetheolympicpeninsula@gmail.com. Your observations will help us educate the Navy, through litigation or otherwise, on what the law requires them to do.
Our initial review of the noise analysis indicates it is deeply flawed. It does not appear to have been a serious attempt to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Examples of its shortcomings are:
- No mobile emitter sites were shown on the area maps, and their locations did not enter into the noise model calculations;
- Flights were assumed to occur, with one exception, evenly across all of the Special Use Areas involved in the study, rather than to be concentrated in the area of the mobile emitter sites;
- The one exception mentioned above, was to assume there would be no flights within the Military Operating Areas (MOAs) closer than three miles from the outside boundaries of the MOAs. Two mobile emitter sites, however, are within the area in which flights were thus assumed not to occur. Because the purpose of the EWR is to detect and target these emitters, it is highly improbable that no flights would occur within those areas.
- The cumulative result of the above shortcomings is to understate the actual average sound levels that will occur in the areas of the mobile emitters, which just happen to be areas of critical habitat for both the marbled murrelet and the spotted owl.
- The noise analysis made no mention of marbled murrelet or spotted owl critical habitat. No critical habitat was shown on the area maps.
There are many more shortcomings. But we want to hear them from you, rather than to suggest them to you. Your views could give us new and even better arguments with which to address the issues. To this end, please review the Navy’s noise analysis in the FEIS. It is referred to as Appendix “J” (click here to view) at some places in the FEIS, and it is physically located between Appendix “I” and Appendix “K” in Volume 4 of the FEIS. You will not find on the document, however, any heading calling it Appendix “J”.
We also ask you to review Appendix “K” (click here to view) which is a flawed analysis of the effects of the EWR on the Olympic National Park World Heritage Site. The erroneous conclusions in Exhibit “K” are largely dependent on the erroneous noise analysis of Appendix “J”.
The FEIS can be downloaded at nwtteis.com. In doing your review, please consider every assertion made by the Navy. Ask yourself whether that assertion is true. Ask yourself whether that assertion is misleading. Ask yourself if there is more to the story than the Navy is saying. Treat this as a mystery game. It can be a challenge that will give you a sense of accomplishment when you find something in need of more study. It will also increase your interest in helping the Navy correct its abuse of our environmental laws.
Sharon Noble
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Those who have the privilege to know have the duty to act.”
~ A. Einstein