Smart Meter Dangers: The Health Hazards of
Wireless Electromagnetic Radiation Exposure
The Latest from Dr. David
O. Carpenter
By
Dr. Ilya Sandra
Perlingieri
Global Research, June 28,
2014
Global Research 13 July
2012
This article by the late
Dr. Ilya Sandra Perlingieri
was first published on Global Research on July 13, 2012.
Over
the past two years, there has been mounting medical and scientific evidence of
the grave biological dangers to humans from so-called “Smart” Meters exposure
that are being installed by the hundreds of thousands all over North America
and Europe. Scientists have been
documenting the EMF/RF exposure effects for decades. However, it is only in the
last two years, with the constant wireless electromagnetic radiation exposure
to these new meters, that other medical evidence (down to the cellular level)
has been reported. In the US, there has never been a mandate to force these
utility meters on millions of unsuspecting people. There has been no Precautionary
Principle used, while corporate greed has abounded. Various utility companies
have not told their customers of the dangers. What they told their customers
about these new meters was that it would update the grid and help them control
individual usage. Customers have not been told about the serious health
problems that these RF pulsing meters cause. We have been given no informed
consent to this dangerous but invisible exposure.
With broken and unethical
global social mores, this is considered standard business practice: to deceive
customers, while gaining enormous profits. As long as a “revolving-door” policy
remains between corporations and [no longer] public agencies, citizens will not
have their medically validated concerns ever addressed. The corporate bottom
line, profit, is what counts –not our well-being and safety. Further, the
synergistic effects of various wireless technologies combined with other
environmental toxins to which we all are exposed daily have not been tested.
Over the past year, I have
already personally seen the damage these dangerous meters have done to numerous
people and several animals I know –all across the US. Although not generally
reported by mainstream media, the serious impacts on peoples’ health are
already evident. A short list includes: neurological impairment, ear pain and
hearing problems, breathing dysfunctions, chest pains and heart ailments,
burning skin, sleep disturbances, headaches, depression, vision troubles, blood
pressure changes, sterility, autism, and neurodegenerative diseases. There are
numerous reports of people who are completely incapacitated from EMF exposure.
Several people I know are almost constantly debilitated and housebound, due to
city-wide exposure to cell towers and Wi-Fi that has become ubiquitous. Most
allopathic physicians are not trained in environmental medicine, and so often
symptoms are mis-diagnosed.
On July 8, Global Research
published Prof. Tracy’s important Smart Meter update, “Looming Health Crisis:
Wireless Technology and the Toxification of America”:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31816
Although Dr. David O.
Carpenter notes below that the “evidence of the link between long-term cell
phone use and brain cancer comes primarily from Northern Europe”, I know
personally of two people who have died from glioma
cancer. The glioma cancer originated behind the ear
where the cell phone was held. This used to be a rare form of malignant brain
cancer. It is now thought to be epidemic, but not reported by the media, as
more than 6-billion cell phones are in use globally. Senator Ted Kennedy died
of glioma cancer.
There is a very long
history of “expendable” customers [we’re no longer called citizens or people],
while multi-national corporations continue to make tremendous profits on
dangerous drugs and technologies: toxic shock syndrome; Vioxx;
thalidomide, HPV vaccines. This list is very long and well documented. For
example, in September 2011, the Los Angeles Time reported “that [prescription]
drug deaths now outnumber traffic fatalities in US.” See: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/17/local/la-me-drugs-epidemic-20110918
What is now termed Electro-Hypersensitivty (EHS), and is recognized in Sweden as a
documented debilitating illness, can actually be called poisoning, as humans
and all other living organisms are being damaged by these meters’
moment-to-moment RF pulsing rates. For more than 30 years, distinguished
professor Olle Johansson, of the Karolinska
Institute, Sweden, has been a highly visible and ardent advocate for those who
have been harmed by this technology. His scientific research is
ground-breaking. In Sweden, more than 248,000 people are ill from EHS. Most
laws are completely outdated to address this crisis. In the US and Canada, many
poisoned customers cannot op-out. Or, if this is available to them, customers
are charged high op-out fees as well as monthly fees. It is a win-win situation
financially for the various utility companies, while customers are being harmed
daily. The corporate bottom line takes precedence over health and safety.
In a Canadian magazine, La
maison du 21e siècle [the house of the 21st
century], Dr. David O. Carpenter, a distinguished physician and former founding
dean of the School of Public Health, State University, Albany (New York), has
just published a letter called “Smart Meters: Correcting the Gross
Misinformation.”(**) It is here reproduced in its entirety:
“We, the undersigned are a
group of scientists and health professionals who together have coauthored
hundreds of peer-reviewed studies.
We wish to correct some of
the gross misinformation found in the letter regarding wireless “smart” meters
that was published in the Montreal daily Le Devoir on May 24. Submitted by a
group Quebec engineers, physicists and chemists, the letter in question reflects
an obvious lack of understanding of the science behind the health impacts of
the radiofrequency (RF)/microwave EMFs emitted by these meters.
The statement that
“Thousands of studies, both epidemiological and experimental in humans, show no
increase in cancer cases as a result of exposure to radio waves of low
intensity…” is false(1).
In fact, only a few such
studies — two dozen case-control studies of mobile phone use, certainly not
thousands, have reported no elevations of cancer, and most were funded by the
wireless industry. In addition, these reassuring studies contained significant
experimental design flaws, mainly the fact that the populations followed were
too small and were followed for a too short period of time.
Non industry-funded studies
have clearly demonstrated a significant increase in cancer cases among
individuals who have suffered from prolonged exposure to low-level microwaves,
transmitted notably by radio antennas. The effects were best documented in
meta-analyses that have been published and that include grouped results from
several different studies: these analyses consistently showed an increased risk
of brain cancer among regular users of a cell phone who have been exposed to
microwaves for at least ten years.
Brain
Cancer Rates
Furthermore, the argument that brain cancer rates do not indicate an overall
increase in incidence is not evidence that cell phones are safe: the latency
for brain cancer in adults after environmental exposure can be long, up to
20-30 years. Most North Americans haven’t used cell phones extensively for that
long. The evidence of the link between long-term cell phone use and brain
cancer comes primarily from Northern Europe, where cell phones have been
commonly used since the 1990s.
Children are especially at
risk. In May 2012, the U.K.’s Office of National Statistics reported a 50
percent increase in incidence of frontal and temporal lobe tumors in children
between 1999 and 2009. This statistic is especially disturbing since in May
2011, after reviewing the published scientific literature regarding cancers
affecting cell phone users, the International Agency for Research on Cancer
(IARC) classified radiofrequency radiation as a 2B, possible human carcinogen.
Despite the absence of scientific consensus, the evidence is sufficiently
compelling for any cautious parent to want to reduce their loved one’s exposure
to RF/microwave emissions as much as possible, as recommended by various
countries such as Austria, Belgium, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom.
Electrosensitivity
Public fears about wireless smart meters are well-founded. They are backed by
various medical authorities such as the Public Health Departments of Santa Cruz
County (California) and of Salzburg State (Austria). These authorities are
worried about the growing number of citizens who say they have developed electrohypersensitivity (EHS), especially since for many of
them, the symptoms developed after the installation of such meters (it takes
some time for most people to link the two events).
Since the turn of the
millennium, people are increasingly affected by ambient microwaves due to the
growing popularity of wireless devices such as cell phones and Wi-Fi Internet.
Therefore, the mass deployment of smart grids could expose large chunks of the
general population to alarming risk scenarios without their consent. According
to seven surveys done in six European countries between 2002 and 2004, about
10% of Europeans have become electrosensitive, and
experts fear that percentage could reach 50% by 2017. The most famous person to
publicly reveal her electrosensitivity is Gro Harlem Brundtland, formerly
Prime Minister of Norway and retired Director of the World Health Organization
(WHO).
While there is no consensus
on the origins and mechanisms of EHS, many physicians and other specialists
around the world have become aware that EHS symptoms (neurological
dermatological, acoustical, etc.) seem to be triggered by exposure to EMF
levels well below current international exposure limits, which are established
solely on short-term thermal effects.(2) Organizations such as the Austrian
Medical Association and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine have
recognized that the ideal way to treat of EHS is to reduce EMF exposure.
Therefore, caution is warranted
because the growing variety of RF/microwave emissions produced by many wireless
devices such as smart meters have never been tested for their potential
biological effects.
Well-known
bioeffects
While the specific pathways to cancer are not fully understood, it is
scientifically unacceptable to deny the weight of the evidence regarding the
increase in cancer cases in humans that are exposed to high levels of
RF/microwave radiation.
The statement that “there
is no established mechanism by which a radio wave could induce an adverse
effect on human tissue other than by heating” is incorrect, and reflects a lack
of awareness and understanding of the scientific literature on the subject. In
fact, more than a thousand studies done on low intensity, high frequency,
non-ionizing radiation, going back at least fifty years, show that some
biological mechanisms of effect do not involve heat. This radiation sends
signals to living tissue that stimulate biochemical changes, which can generate
various symptoms and may lead to diseases such as cancer.
Even though RF/microwaves
don’t have the energy to directly break chemical bonds, unlike ionizing
radiation such as X-rays, there is scientific evidence that this energy can
cause DNA damage indirectly leading to cancer by a combination of biological
effects. Recent publications have documented the generation of free radicals,
increased permeability of the blood brain barrier allowing potentially toxic
chemicals to enter the brain, induction of genes, as well as altered electrical
and metabolic activity in human brains upon application of cell phone
RF/microwaves similar to those produced by smart meters.
These effects are
cumulative and depend on many factors including RF/microwave levels, frequency,
waveform, exposure time, bio-variability between individuals and combination
with other toxic agents. Clear evidence that these microwaves are indeed
bioactive has been shown by the fact that low-intensity EMFs have proven
clinically useful in some circumstances. Pulsed EMFs have long been used to
successfully treat bone fractures that are resistant to other forms of therapy.
More recently, frequency-specific, amplitude-modulated EMFs have been found
useful to treat advanced carcinoma and chronic pain.
High frequency EMFs such as
the microwaves used in cell phones, smart meters, Wi-Fi and cordless ‘‘DECT’’
phones, appear to be the most damaging when used commonly. Most of their
biological effects, including symptoms of electrohypersensitivity,
can be seen in the damage done to cellular membranes by the loss of
structurally-important calcium ions. Prolonged exposure to these high
frequencies may eventually lead to cellular malfunction and death.
Furthermore, malfunction of
the parathyroid gland, located in the neck just inches from where one holds a
cell phone, may actually cause electrohypersensitivity
in some people by reducing the background level of calcium ions in the blood.
RF/microwave radiation is also known to decrease the production of melatonin,
which protects against cancer, and to promote the growth of existing cancer
cells.
Early warning scientists attacked
In recommending that the
Precautionary Principle be applied in EMF matters, the European Environment
Agency’s Director Jacqueline McGlade wrote in 2009:
“We have noted from previous health hazard histories such as that of lead in
petrol, and methyl mercury, that ‘early warning’ scientists frequently suffer
from discrimination, from loss of research funds, and from unduly personal
attacks on their scientific integrity. It would be surprising if this is not
already a feature of the present EMF controversy…” Such unfortunate
consequences have indeed occurred.
The
statement in the Le Devoir letter that “if we consider that a debate should
take place, it should focus exclusively on the effects of cell phones on
health” is basically an acknowledgement that there is at least some reason to
be concerned about cell phones.
However, while the immediate exposure from a cell phone is of much greater
intensity than the exposure from smart meters, cell phone use is temporary.
Smart
meters
Wireless smart meters typically produce atypical, relatively potent and very
short pulsed RF/microwaves whose biological effects have never been fully
tested. They emit these millisecond-long RF bursts on average 9,600 times a day
with a maximum of 190,000 daily transmissions and a peak level emission two and
a half times higher than the stated safety signal [Perlingieri’s
italics], as the California utility Pacific Gas & Electric recognized
before that State’s Public Utilities Commission. Thus people in proximity to a
smart meter are at risk of significantly greater aggregate exposure than with a
cell phone, not to mention the cumulative levels of RF/microwaves that people
living near several meters are exposed to.
People are exposed to cell
phone microwaves primarily in the head and neck, and only when they use their
device. With smart meters, the entire body is exposed to the microwaves, which
increases the risk of overexposure to many organs.
In addition to these
erratic bursts of modulated microwaves coming from smart meters that are
transferring usage data to electric, gas and water utilities, wireless and
wired smart (powerline communication) meters are also
a major source of ‘’dirty electricity’’ (electrical interference of high
frequency voltage transients typically of kilohertz frequencies). Indeed, some
scientists, such as American epidemiologist Sam Milham,
believe that many of the health complaints about smart meters may also be
caused by dirty electricity generated by the “switching” power supply
activating all smart meters. Since the installation of filters to reduce dirty
electricity circulating on house wiring has been found to relieve symptoms of
EHS in some people, this method should be considered among the priorities aimed
at reducing potential adverse impacts.
Rather
be safe than sorry
The apparent adverse health effects noted with smart meter exposure are likely
to be further exacerbated if smart appliances that use wireless communications
become the norm and further increase unwarranted exposure.
To date, there have been few independent studies of the health effects of such
sources of more continuous but lower intensity microwaves. However, we know
after decades of studies of hazardous chemical substances, that chronic
exposure to low concentrations of microwaves can cause equal or even greater
harm than an acute exposure to high concentrations of the same microwaves.
This is why so many
scientists and medical experts urgently recommend that measures following the
Precautionary Principle be applied immediately — such as using wired meters —
to reduce biologically inappropriate microwave exposure. We are not advocating
the abolishment of RF technologies, only the use of common sense and the
development and implementation of best practices in using these technologies in
order to reduce exposure and risk of health hazards.
Notes
1. Scientific papers on EMF
health effects:
www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp
2. Explanation and studies
on electrosensitivity:
www.powerwatch.org.uk/health/sensitivity.asp
3. Governments and
organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology:
www.cellphonetaskforce.org/?page_id=128
[Letter signed by:]
*David O. Carpenter, MD,
Director, Institute for Health & the Environment, University at Albany, USA
*Jennifer Armstrong, MD, Past President, Canadian Society of Environmental
Medicine, Founder, Ottawa Environmental Health Clinic, Ontario, Canada
*Pierre L. Auger, M. D., FRCPC, Occupational medicine, Multiclinique
des accidentés 1464, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
*Fiorella Belpoggi,
Director, Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, Ramazzini Institute, Bologna, Italy
*Martin Blank, PhD, former President, Bioelectromagnetics
Society, Special Lecturer, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics,
Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA
*Barry Breger, MD, Centre d’intégration
somatosophique (orthomolecular medicine), Montreal,
Quebec
*John Cline, MD, Professor, Institute for Functional Medicine, Federal Way, WA,
USA, Medical Director, Cline Medical Centre, Nanaimo, BC, Canada
*Alvaro Augusto de Salles, PhD, Professor of
Electrical Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul,
Porto Alegre, Brazil
*Christos Georgiou, Prof. Biochemistry, Biology Department, University of Patras, Greece
*Andrew Goldsworthy, PhD, Honorary lecturer in Biology, Imperial College,
London, UK
*Claudio Gómez-Perretta, MD, PhD, Director, Centro de
Investigación, Hospital Universitario
LA Fe, Valencia, Spain
*Livio Giuliani, PhD, Senior Researcher, National
Insurance Institute (INAIL), Chief of Radiation and Ultrasounds Research Unit,
Rome, Italy
*Yury Grigoriev, PhD, Chair
Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Moscow, Russia
*Settimio Grimaldi, PhD,
Director, Institute of Translational Pharmacology (Neurobiology and molecular
medicine), National Research Council, Rome, Italy
*Magda Havas, PhD, Centre for Health Studies, Trent
University, Canada
*Lennart Hardell, MD, Professor of Oncology,
University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden
*Denis L. Henshaw, PhD, Professor of Physics, Head of
The Human Radiation Effects Group, University of Bristol, UK
*Ronald B. Herberman, MD, Chairman of Board,
Environmental Health Trust, and Founding Director emeritus, University of
Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, USA
*Isaac Jamieson, PhD Environmental Science (electromagnetic phenomena in the
built environment), independent architect, scientist and environmental
consultant, Hertfordshire, UK
*Olle Johansson, PhD, Professor of Neuroscience
(Experimental Dermatology Unit), Karolinska
Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
*Yury Kronn, PhD, Soviet
authority on physics of nonlinear vibrations and high frequency electromagnetic
vibrations, founder of Energy Tools International, Oregon, USA
*Henry Lai, PhD, Professor of Bioengineering, University of Washington School
of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
*Abraham R. Liboff, PhD, Professor Emeritus,
Department of Physics, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA
*Don Maisch, PhD, Researcher on radiation exposure
standards for telecommunications frequency, EMFacts
Consultancy, Tasmania, Australia
*Andrew A. Marino, MD, PhD, JD, Professor of Neurology, LSU Health Sciences
Center, Shreveport, LA, USA
*Karl Maret, MD, M.Eng.,
President, Dove Health Alliance, Aptos, CA, USA
*Sam Milham, MD, former chief epidemiologist,
Washington State Department of Health, USA
*Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, Director, Center for Family and Community Health,
School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley
*Gerd Oberfeld, MD, Public
Health Department, Salzburg State Government, Austria
*Jerry L. Phillips, PhD, Director, Center for Excellence in Science, Department
of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado, USA
*John Podd, PhD, Professor of Psychology
(experimental neuropsychology), Massey University, New-Zeland
*William J. Rea, MD, thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon, founder of the
Environmental Health Center, Dallas, Tx, USA
*Elihu D. Richter, MD, Professor, Hebrew
University-Hadassah School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Jerusalem,
Israel
*Leif G. Salford, MD, Senior Professor of
Neurosurgery, Lund University, Sweden
*Nesrin Seyhan, MD, Founder
and Chair of Biophysics, Medical Faculty of Gazi
University, Turkey
*Cyril W. Smith, PhD, lead author of “Electromagnetic Man”, retired from
Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Salford,
UK
*Morando Soffritti, MD,
Scientific Director of the European Foundation for Oncology and Environmental
Sciences “B. Ramazzini” in Bologna, Italy
*Antoinette “Toni” Stein, PhD, Collaborative on Health and the Environment
(CHE-EMF Working Group), Co-Coordinator, Berkeley, CA, USA
*Stanislaw Szmigielski, MD, PhD, Professor of
Pathophysiology, Consulting Expert, former director of Microwave Safety,
Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Warsaw, Poland
*Bradford S. Weeks, MD, Director, The Weeks Clinic, Clinton, WA, USA
*Stelios A. Zinelis, MD, Vice-President, Hellenic
Cancer Society, Cefallonia,
Greece
Maison Saine. 11 July, 2012.
Quebec-based magazine La Maison du 21e siècle asked
physician David O. Carpenter, former founding dean of the University at Albany
(NY)’s School of Public Health, to comment on a letter published in the
Montreal daily Le Devoir last May 24. This letter claimed wireless smart meters
pose no risk to public health. Some forty international experts contributed to
the following rebuttal. See, Dr. David O. Carpenter:
http://maisonsaine.ca/smart-meters-correcting-the-gross-misinformation/#comment-120283
NOTE: This original article
link (above) also has numerous medical links.
Also see:
“The Invisible Hazards of
Smart Meters”: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26082
“Smart Meter Dangers
Update”:
http://consciouslifenews/com/smart-meter-dangers-update-scientific-proof-hazards/1124466
Jerry Day. “We are EMR
Guinea Pigs”:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX-mdciSUC0
Gunni Nordström. “The
Invisible Disease. The Dangers of
Environmental Illnesses caused by Electromagnetic Fields and Chemical
Emissions”
“There’s a Reason Cell
Rhymes with Hell.” The Electromagnetic Effects of Cell Phones and Other
Wireless Devices:
http://archivesmb.wordpress.com/the-electromagnetic-effects-of-cell-phones
Educator and environmental
writer Dr. Ilya
Sandra Perlingieri is the author of the highly
acclaimed book, “The Uterine Crisis.” London’s The Ecologist call this book
an
”inspiration”
www.globalresearch.ca/smart-meter-dangers-the-health-hazards-of-wireless-electromagnetic-radiation-exposure/31891"
data-title="Smart Meter Dangers: The Health Hazards of Wireless
Electromagnetic Radiation Exposure">