Stop OC Smart Meters Stop OC Smart Meters

Public Health Danger

As the number of health complaints grow it is increasingly difficult to ignore their desperate cries for help.   It's inhumane. 


One couple we have communicated with live, with their baby, above a bank of 8 smart meters.  Their baby wakes up every night since the smart meter was installed holding his head and crying.  


RF problems seem to occur when the meter is too close to a person for a sustained period of time (i.e., on a bedroom wall) or in bank situations when there are multiple meters (i.e.,.apartment/condos). Of course, time exposure and personal sensitivity (immune systems) are factors as well.  By the way, these meters never turn off.  They constantly transmit.  SCE will tell you that they only emit RF 15 seconds per day.   Not true....and they have admitted it.  I've measured it myself.  Besides how else can you get real time data usage if it is not on all the time?

Like cell phones, Smart Meters produce pulsed Radio Frequency (RF) radiation, but at elevated levels on an almost continuous 24/7 basis.  RF has been labeled a possible class 2B carcinogen by the World Health Organization on the same scale as lead and diesel fuel.  Smart Meters contain 100 times more RF exposure than a cell phone, says a UC nuclear expert.  Adverse health effects have been widely reported to the CPUC after installation of their Smart Meter. Symptoms reported include headaches, inability to sleep, nausea, vertigo, ringing in the ears, heart palpitations, skin rashes, etc.  


"The company has not studied health effects, (Southern California Edison's Ken) Devore said, but the communications system runs within Federal Communications Commission standards."  Unbelievable. --- - O.C. Residents Fight Edison Digital Meter Installation OC Register, Sept. 29, 2011

Please tell us why was the Environmental Impact Report for Smart Meters waived?

WARNING: Pacemakers Effected by Smart Meters




It is confusing to consumers, because there are two camps. On the one hand, the utility companies say Smart Meters are as safe or safer than cell phones. The other camp refutes these statements saying that Smart Meters pose serious health consequences and there is not enough research to determine the short term as well as long term effects of constant exposure to pulsed RF radiation.


Clearly, more research needs to be done. And until those findings come in we should we not err on the side of caution?



How is using a cell phone different from a Smart Meter?


  • Choice. We can choose to own a cell phone and how much to use it.  Smart Meters are forced on our homes exposing us to constant 24/7 pulsed RF radiation (see research, below)


  • Level of radiation.   According to researchers quoted below, Smart Meters produce substantially greater levels than those from point source WI-FI routers, microwave ovens and cell phones .


How does a Smart Meter constantly pulse RF radiation?


Currently, SCE is in the process of converting all our analog electrical meters to digital wireless meters.  Meter readers will no longer be required to come to your home.   All of your electric usage will be transmitted wirelessly back to SCE through elevated pulsed RF levels on a continuous 24/7 basis.  


SCE literature claim that the Smart Meters pulse RF is merely 45 seconds per day.   However, because these meters continuously communicate with each other, or “chatter”, the pulsed RF radiation is virtually constant.



Is RF radiation dangerous according to the FCC?


SCE states that they are FCC compliant with current RF radiation safety standards. However, many researchers state that these FCC standards, written in the 1990’s, are inadequate and outdated for today's wireless society.


Further, most utility or government sponsered studies only account for one Smart Meter on a home, but with the addition of natural gas and water Smart Meters, the risks are tripled.  And imagine the effects from clusters of Smart Meters on apartment houses!


How many people have to get sick before the FCC updates its safety standards?

Which reports did SCE rely on to prove that Smart Meters are considered safe?

In January 2011, the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) produced a report called Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters (pdf).  For rebuttals to that study see research below.



Where is the Environmental Impact Study and why was it WAIVED for Smart Meters?


Microwave radiation from these six smart meters penetrates through the brick wall of this townhouse and causes very strong exposure levels inside the house. A young child spends most of her time in this living room, near to where the meters are located. Is her health is being endangered by exposure to this radiation?


Below are only a few of the experts warning of danger:


In May 2011, World Health Organization changed their position and now classify RF radiation from cell phones as a 2B level carcinogen. “The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use.” WHO Press Release

In November 2011, Dr. Franz Adlkofer, former executive director of the VERUM Foundation for Behavior and Environment, spoke at Harvard Law School and discussed the difficulties he and other scientists face when presenting research on the carcinogenic effects of electromagnetic fields emanating from cell phones. He also discussed the institutional corruption which he says obstructs their research.

“The practices of institutional corruption in the area of wireless communication are of enormous concern...”


Adlkofer described his experience with the EU-funded study REFLEX (pdf), which aimed to explore the effects of cell-phone radiation on the brain. The study’s conclusions demonstrated that low frequency as well as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below the allowed exposure limits displayed gene-damaging potential.


In 2004, shortly after releasing those findings, Adlkofer was the target of allegations questioning the validity of the findings and even accusing him of fraud. While an ethics panel eventually dismissed the accusations, his struggle against slander continues, he said.


In May 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified high frequency electromagnetic fields including cell phone radiation as merely “possibly carcinogenic” for humans, Adlkofer pointed out that had the studies such as REFLEX been taken into account in reaching that determination the classification likely would have changed from “possibly” carcinogenic to “probably.”



Cindy Sage, involved in EMF issues as an environmental consultant and public policy researcher for 30 years, released a study on the radiation emissions from Smart Meters. Based on her findings:   “Advise the California Legislature that further assessment of Smart Meters impacts to public health and safety are necessary before further deployment”.


Dr. David Carpenter, Harvard Medical School-trained physician who headed up the New York State Dept. of Public Health for 18 years before becoming Dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Albany, where he currently directs the Institute for Health and the Environment is an expert in EMR says:



"The question to ask them (the Central Maine Power) is 'What is the evidence that Smart Meters are safe and have no adverse health effects?'  And the answer to that question is that there is no such evidence and, in fact, while no one has actually done human health studies in relation to people who are living in homes with Smart Meters, we have evidence from a whole variety of other sources of RF exposure that demonstrate convincingly and consistently that exposure to RF radiation at elevated levels for long periods of time increases the risk of cancer, increases the damage to the nervous system, causes electro sensitivity, has adverse reproductive affects, and a variety of affects on different organ systems.  So there is no justification for the statement that 'Smart Meters have no adverse health effects.' Well, it should be up to each individual to identify whether or not they want to be continuously exposed 24/7 to elevated levels of RF radiation.  


The Smart Meter is for the benefit for the utility, saves them money because they don't have to then have people going out reading the meters.  And it is at the expense of the consumer who has to live in the house that has this constant exposure.  So an informed person should be demand that they be allowed to keep their analog meter."



In a study conducted by Daniel Hirsh, a lecturer teaching nuclear policy at UCSC claims, "New calculations suggest that continuous whole-body exposure to electro-magnetic radiation from so-called ‘smart’ meters – which operate around the clock – may be between 50 and 160 times worse [than] that from cell phones", which are increasingly being linked to brain tumors. 



Olle Johansson, Ph.D and Associate Professor in the Department of Neuroscience at Karlinska Institute in Sweden, where "electrohypersensitivity (EHS) is an officially fully recognized functional impairment (i.e., it is not regarded as a disease)" and about 3% of the population "report a variety of symtoms when being in contact with electromagnetic field sources."  He wrote a damaging letter of concern to the CPUC outlining serious concerns regarding the safety of Smart Meters and that FCC public safety limits (on RF radiation), which were the basis of the CPIC report, are outdated and inadequate. 


"it is becoming more and more obvious that the exposure to electromagnetic fields may result in highly unwanted health effects. This has been demonstrated in a very large number of studies and includes cellular DNA-damage (which may lead to an initiation of cancer as well as mutations that carry down generations), disruptions and alterations of cellular functions like increases in intracellular stimulatory pathways and calcium handling, disruption of tissue structures like the blood-brain barrier (which may allow toxins to enter the brain), impact on vessel and immune functions, and loss of fertility. It should be noted that we are not the only species at jeopardy, practically all animals and plants may be at stake."


He goes on to say, "policy makers immediately should strictly control exposure by defining biologically-based maximal exposure guidelines also taking into account long-term, non-thermal effects, and including especially vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, the ill, the genetically and/or immunologically challenged, children and fetuses, and persons with the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity"


Finally, he states writes,  “Many smart meters are close to beds, kitchens, playrooms, and similar locations. These wireless systems are never off, and the exposure is not voluntary. The smart meters are being forced on citizens everywhere. Based on this, the inauguration of smart meters with grudging and involuntary exposure of millions to billions of human beings to pulsed microwave radiation should immediately be prohibited…”


Elihu D Richter MD, MPH (Assoc Professor), Hebrew University-Hadassah, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Unit of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Medical Epidemiologist writes on Smart Meters,

"Smart grid networks, if using RF, will generate 24/7 round the clock ubiquitous involuntary indoor exposures to RF – in the everyday background environment of everyone in California in human habitats. The background exposures produced by these grids will be substantially greater than those from point source WI-FI routers, microwave ovens and cell phones. These whole body exposures, though perhaps below levels of current regulatory standards, (INCRIP-WHO, and IEEE), will exceed cumulative time weighted exposures producing the above outcomes, based on the literature.



Lukas H. Margaritis, Professor of Cell Biology and Electron Microscopy and Adamantia F. Fragopoulou, Biologist and Researcher from the University of Athens, Greece, comment, “The California Council of Science and Technology has released a report on WIRELESS SMART METERS, in which any relation with health hazards has been bypassed. It is however ‘common secret’ between the researchers in the field of electromagnetic biology that such a statement has absolutely no scientific validity…


Raymond Richard Neutra MD, Dr. PH, in response to the CCST report concludes his comments by stating, “This is not the way I would like to see public policy pursued. Unfortunately you are not alone in this pattern of language use, hidden assumptions and making the uncertain seem certain so a to provide cover for policy.



Samuel Milham, MD, MPH, Epidemiologist, Retired – Washington State Health DepartmentDirty electricity levels measured in homes, offices and schools should increase after the meters are deployed. Dirty electricity levels measured in the utility drops and in the earth will also increase as the meters are deployed. Since dirty electricity is a potent carcinogen (see attached paper and pp. 78-80 in my book), and causes numerous health problems, the only way to avoid a public health catastrophe is to send the smart meter information over existing telephone land lines or go back to the analog meters. I’m not making light of or ignoring the RF pollution caused by the smart meters, but think the dirty electricity may be a more serious and intractable problem."



Magda Havas, BSc, PhD, Environmental and Resource Studies at Trent University, writes, "In my opinion, the FCC standard for Smart Meters is not sufficient to protect public health."


Dr. Om Gandhi, a pioneer researcher in the bioeffects of EMF exposure, explains why the recent explosion of wireless devices has made existing US EMF exposure 'guidelines' dangerously outdated.