1) “The Internet of Things” by the Office of the Canadian Privacy Commissioner, report published Feb. 2016.
“Echoing several of the messages in the Article 29 Working Party opinion, international data protection authorities adopted the Mauritius Declaration on the Internet of Things.8 In this declaration, regulators made several observations, concluding that sensor data are so high in quantity, quality and sensitivity, that such data should be regarded and treated as personal data. They commented on the business models that they anticipate to be spawned by the Internet of Things, recognizing that the value is not in the devices themselves, but rather in new services related to the Internet of Things and in the data they can amass and combine. The regulators also highlighted transparency as a key concern, arguing that consent obtained on the basis of existing privacy policies—lengthy and complex as they are—is not likely to be informed. As well, the regulators expressed deep concern about the security challenges posed by the Internet of Things…
Companies will be looking to exploit these data to develop new business models and transition from selling us just “things” at one point in time, such as a battery operated fire detector, to value-added, for-fee services, such as remote fire detection monitoring…
4. Privacy Implications
As individuals will have their daily activities and behaviours measured, recorded and analyzed, there is a pressing need for developers and policy-makers to turn their minds to informing consumers and citizens as to who collects what kind of personal information, how it is then stored, used and disclosed to whom and for what purposes. Privacy principles dictate that users should be able to keep control of their data as well as to be able to opt out of the “smart” environment without incurring negative consequences. How will this unfold, and will traditional privacy principles be addressed?
Before we too readily endorse smart devices and sensors that can send into the cloud information about many personal aspects of our daily lives, it is essential to have an informed discussion about the implications of the Internet of Things and to plan the integration of privacy principles and safeguards into the conception and implementation of the many smart environment components.
Information collected by sensors within objects that are connected to each other can yield a tremendous amount of data that can be combined, analyzed and acted upon, all potentially without adequate accountability, transparency, security or meaningful consent.
Smart home devices can also be very telling about the number of people who live in a home, details about their daily habits as well as changes in their routines. In the case of smart meters, there is concern that widespread deployment has focused on energy conservation at the expense of privacy. In the absence of a framework clearly providing choice and control to the consumer and establishing strict collection, use and disclosure rules, the information revealed could be used for data mining, insurance claims or litigation purposes, to name a few potential secondary uses.
2) Independent science has provided many hundreds, even thousands, of studies over several decades showing that prolonged exposure to microwave radiation from wireless technology can cause many serious health effects, including cancer. Yet agencies such as Health Canada say that they have to look at industry funded studies, too. It has been shown by Harvard University and Dr. Henry Lai that industry funded studies tend to show no effects (70% of the time) while independent studies show serious effects 70% of the time. Here are some examples about “twisted” science and “scientists”, like those at Exponent who defended smeters before BCUC.
3) Here is a 10 minute video in which Dr. Karl Maret explains the effects on children of exposure to Wi-Fi in schools. The technology is developing, becoming stronger, and has never been proven to be safe. In fact, as you know from all the info I’ve shared, the opposite is true. The $$meter’s second transmitter, the ZigBee chip, the one that will be communicating with appliances all through the home, emitting radiation all day throughout our homes, uses the same frequency (2.4 Ghz) as the Wi-Fi in schools about which Dr. Maret warns. Our Provincial Health Officer, Dr. Perry Kendall, knows about this, we’ve told him, yet he does nothing to stop this microwave exposure either in schools or in our homes. He tells the public there is no definite proof of harm, therefore there is nothing to worry about.
Video: Wi-Fi Effect on Children with EHS
Dr.Karl Maret, MD, with degrees also in electrical engineering and biomedical engineering, former researcher in the Canadian Armed Forces and expert in electromagnetic fields, talks about Wi-Fi and EHS. Wi-Fi has evolved to very high speeds. We are now at 1800 times faster speeds than we were back in 1997 with 1st generation Wi-Fi. (The higher the speed, the greater the amount of data that is transferred in the same period of time, and the greater the potential for interference within our bodies)
1997 – 1st Generation – 2Mbps (megabytes per second)
1999 – 2nd Generation – 11Mbps
2002 – 3rd Generation – 54Mbps
2007 – 4th Generation – 600Mbps
2012 – 5th Generation – 3600Mbps
Used a German dosimeter to record levels of Wi-Fi radiation exposures on an EHS child at school and correlates symptoms (headaches) to chart of Wi-Fi signals – when the Wi-Fi levels were high, the student developed headaches. Levels of school Wi-Fi are much higher than that in a coffee shop. Human brain has 5 million magnetite crystals/gram tissue, and these crystals absorb wireless radiation.
One of the members has written a letter of comment to the BCUC:
The following document has been posted on the BCUC web: www.bcuc.com
Application: BC Hydro 2015 Rate Design Application
Document Type: Hearing Document
Sent: March 17, 2016 5:06 PM
To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; tips@GlobalTVBC.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Legislature Victoria Monday 10:30
I will suspend the fast re WorkSafe for the weekend to resume again Monday Morning. Many friends have contacted me re the no liquid part of the fast, they have considerably more concern about my health than the heartless government. I almost had the feeling the government liked the idea of no liquid as I would be out of their way quicker.
I will also be available by phone xxxxxxxxxx from approximately Friday 9:00 to 12:00 (PDL) Friday morning in particular and at other times throughout the weekend if more information is required.
I did note Minister Shirley Bond did have time to come out on the front steps for a photo op – one would expect the Minster responsible for Labour (or is that the minster Ir-responsible for labour) would have been able to find the time to understand the issues an injured worker faces before she scurried back to hide in the legislature building again. I will spend the weekend preparing a file of some of the worst examples of how WorkSafe/WCAT operate. Also some of the evidence to support WorkSafe/WCAT have not followed due process in dealing with my claim.
The evidence the Assistant Deputy Minister Trevor Hughes has refused to see and Minister Bond has ignored requests to show her or senior people in her ministry.
Below is a link to a video about EHS and what it is like to live with EHS.
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) What is it like to live with it
The highly dangerous and unpredictable zones around Cell Towers, Cell Phones other radiating devices
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
Power of the People is stronger than
the People in Power