1) Below is a letter written by a member to Health Canada re. Safety Code. 6. We have under July 15 to send in comments. Please consider doing so.
2) In Australia, Members of Parliament from both sides happily concurred that it was a mistake to have made the rollout compulsory.
3) RF-EMFcan trigger oxidative stress and interfere with cellular processes– Smart Meter Harm – July 01, 2014:
Full paper, translated: Increasing incidence of burnout due to magnetic and electromagnetic fields of cell phone networks and other wireless communication technologies by Ulrich Warnke and Peter Hensinger – 2013:
4) The fight to keep out $$meters is now beginning in Bermuda. http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20140704/BUSINESS/140709863&source=RSS
5) In the UKa publicity campaign is starting that will aim at highlighting lifestyle changes, using charities and unions to soften the message, to convince the 56% of the public who don’t want $$meters.
While in Chicago they are soft-selling $meters via an ice cream truck!!
I have read Safety Code 6 and I have also read several technical papers about RF radiation and the dangers posed by the pulsed, frequency-hopping radiation of smart meters and similar emitting devices not under he control of the Public.
I am disappointed by the Royal Society Report conclusions.
The report relies almost entirely on SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) for its assessment of risk. The focus on SAR means that many potentially relevant studies were not included or were dismissed.
In their denial of non-thermal effects, the RSC panel and Safety Code 6 dismisses a critical reported effect on DNA by the pulsed, frequency-hopping radiation.
Why did this panel ignore the peer-reviewed papers documenting EMF interaction with DNA?
These effects have been known for some time, and like the DNA damage, they occur at exposures well below levels currently considered safe.
Code 6 committee have failed to update the EMF safety standards using the latest and most relevant scientific information.
In fact, they have overlooked the biological data about protective cellular reactions to EMF that are critical for determining safe exposure limits.
It makes absolutely no sense to erect a complex regulatory structure on a faulty scientific foundation.
Your responsibility is to protect the Public, not to allow intrusion and long-term damage to humans by Industry and the special interest groups financed by Industry.
I need you to seriously reconsider the structure of Safety Code 6 and how it fails to protect children and the general Public from full-time exposure to RF radiation.
I will be watching for your response, since the Public needs to hold you responsible, as no-one else will.
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters