Der Widerstand gegen die Strahlenangriffe mit Stromzählern wächst, zumindest in den USA. Hier Rückgabeaktionen und Proteste von BIs in
Kalifornien, USA, deren Mitglieder über kranke Menschen berichten, die aus ihren Häusern flüchten mussten:
Hier ein Interview mit Joshua Hart, "Director of Stop Smart Meters!", eine Bürgerorganisation der direkten Organisation und Beratung von Dutzenden Gruppen, die die Angriffe mit Mikrowellen-Stromzählern bekämpfen, welche "eine große Bedrohung von Gesundheit, Sicherheit, Privatsphäre und Brieftasche sind, ebenso wie eine Spionagemöglichkeit, zentralisierte Überwachung und Kontrolle durch Konzerne."
Es tauchen Dokumente auf, die den Verdacht zunehmend bestätigen, dass diese Gewaltaktionen von Regierungsseite (Washington) mit Steuergeldern von ca. 300 000 000 $ bezahlt werden. Nachfolgend die entsprechende "Hilfevereinbarung", "nur für den offiziellen Gebrauch":
Hierbei sollte man noch berücksichtigen, dass in der USA die Stromzähler draussen vor dem Haus montiert sind.
Hier in D sind sie in einem Zählerkasten untergebracht der aus Metallblech besteht, jedenfalls das äussere Gehäuse.
Wenn, würde hier eher das Powerlan zum Einsatz kommen anstatt das W-Lan.
Denn in einem Abgeschirmten Gehäuse hätte das W-Lan seine Schwierigkeiten die Informationen weiter zu geben.
Zumal es ein leichtes ist der Zähler abzuschirmen, so wie ich es gemacht habe.
Darum denke ich, wenn eine Fernauslesung erfolgen sollte, dann über Powerlan, denn da hat man keine Möglichkeit was dagegen zu tun.
Aber dabei werden alle Stromleitungen zu Antennen.
Hier eine Mail von Steven Boone, einem der Organisatoren bzgl. Brüssel-Petition vor einigen Monaten - leider in Englisch:
Some 80 percent of European consumers are set to have smart energy meters installed in their homes by 2020 (businessweek.com)
"Here's another layer of radiation that independent scientists have been saying for years that is harmful, not potentially harmful, it is harmful (Milt Bowling, president Clean Energy Foundation)
An independent survey of 443 individuals indicated that 49% of respondents claimed they or a member of their household had health problems after having the Wireless Meters installed. 94% of the respondents stated that they wished to retain or have their analogue meters reinstated (surveydna.com 2011).
"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" (Professor Olle Johansson)
"The smart meter basically watches everything that goes on in the house down to the microsecond, it tells them what was turned on, when it was turned on, how long it was used for" (Josef Tyls, Environmental Engineer)
"With this new technology you no longer have privacy in your own home" (Walt McGinnis, StopSmartMeters.ca)
"The government is not prepared to tell the truth and is not prepared to have a debate and if that's the case we only have one thing left and that's people power" (Rafe Mair, former British Columbia Minister of Environment)
(this petition is directed to the government in the US, but also non-US-citizens can sign the petition)
"I am hopeful that the people will rise up against the smart meters" (Bill Vander Zalm, former Premier British Columbia)
The book "Smart Meters - Smarter Practices" by Dr. Jamieson (commissioned by the UK EM Radiation Research Trust), comprises 265 pages of research & current knowledge of health & environmental effects from the smart meters. This work is a highly recommended read and can be downloaded (for free) on:
From the AAEM website:
Who We Are
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine was founded in 1965, and is an international association of physicians and other professionals interested in the clinical aspects of humans and their environment. The Academy is interested in expanding the knowledge of interactions between human individuals and their environment, as these may be demonstrated to be reflected in their total health. The AAEM provides research and education in the recognition, treatment and prevention of illnesses induced by exposures to biological and chemical agents encountered in air, food and water.
AAEM’s January 23, 2012 statement represents the first national physician's group to look in-depth at wireless health risks; and to advise the public and decision-makers about preventative public health actions that are necessary.
Proposed Decision of Commissioner Peevey (Mailed 1/22/2012) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
On the proposed decision 11-03-014
The Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine opposes the installation of wireless "smart meters" in homes and schools based on a scientific assessment of the current medical literature (references available on request). Chronic exposure to wireless radiofrequency radiation is a preventable environmental hazard that is sufficiently well documented to warrant immediate preventative public health action.
As representatives of physician specialists in the field of environmental medicine, we have an obligation to urge precaution when sufficient scientific and medical evidence suggests health risks which can potentially affect large populations. The literature raises serious concern regarding the levels of radio frequency (RF - 3 KHz - 300 GHz) or extremely low frequency (ELF - o- 300 Hz) exposures produced by "smart meters" to warrant an immediate and complete moratorium on their use and deployment until further study can be performed.
The board of the American Board of Environmental Medicine wishes to point out that existing FCC guidelines for RF safety that have been used to justify installation of "smart meters" only look at thermal tissue damage and are obsolete, since many modern studies show metabolic and genomic damage from RF and ELF exposures below the level of intensity which heats tissues. The FCC guidelines are therefore inadequate for use in establishing public health standards. More modern literature shows medically and biologically significant effects of RF and ELF at lower energy densities. These effects accumulate over time, which is an important consideration given the chronic nature of exposure from "smart meters".
The current medical literature raises credible questions about genetic and cellular effects, hormonal effects, male fertility, blood/brain barrier damage and increased risk of certain types of cancers from RF or ELF levels similar to those emitted from "smart meters". Children are placed at particular risk for altered brain development, and impaired learning and behavior. Further EMF/RF adds synergistic effects to the damage observed from a range of toxic chemicals.
Given the widespread, chronic and essentially inescapable ELF/RF exposure of everyone living near a "smart meter", the Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine finds it unacceptable from a public health standpoint to implement this technology until these serious medical concerns are resolved. We consider a moratorium on installation of wireless "smart meters" to be an issue of the highest importance.
The Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine also wises to note that the US NIEHS National Toxicology Program in 1999 cited radiofrequency radiation as a potential carcinogen. Existing safety limits for pulsed RF were termed "not protective of public health" by the Radiofrequency Interagency Working Group (a federal interagency working group including the FDA, FCC, OSHA, the EPA and others). Emissions given off by "smart meters" have been classified by the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a Possible Human Carcinogen.
Hence, we call for:
• An immediate moratorium on "smart meter" installation until these serious public health issues are resolved. Continuing with their installation would be extremely irresponsible.
• Modify the revised proposed decision to include hearings on health impact in the second proceedings, along with cost evaluation and community wide opt-out.
• Provide immediate relief to those requesting it and restore the analog meters.
Stell Dir vor, es gibt Funk, und keiner nutzt ihn :-D
On Tuesday, January 24th, the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors voted to continue the ordinance for a moratorium on SmartMeter installations in the county; accepted the report from the Public Health Department on harm to health from wireless SmartMeters; and to sign the petition to the CPUC defining problems with the SmartMeter Opt Out proposal.
About 30 people testified from the public in support of these items. Two people spoke as reps from the IBEW (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers) claiming that workers were being threatened as they tried to install SmartMeters. This claim has not been substantiated, which was later made clear by the Supervisors and Legal Council, Dana McRae.
Currently you can access the agenda packet, including downloading a pdf file by scrolling down and clicking on the icon for item 41 at the following website -
The packet includes the Ordinance, the Public Health Department Report and the Petition to the CPUC.
You will find a summary of the Public Health Department report below. This report delineates the history of why current US guidelines for exposure to microwaves are not protective and provides some of the latest research into the adverse health effects from microwaves that are emitted by wireless devices, including Smart Meters.
Public Health Department Report for Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors
Poki Stewart Namkung, M.D., M.P.H.
Health Risks Associated With SmartMeters
(Excerpted summary by Angela Flynn)
SmartMeters have pulsed frequencies within the 800 MHz to 2400MHz range, falling in the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. They are part of a mesh network, which has pole-mounted wireless antennas at the neighborhood level to collect and transmit wireless information and collector meters on some homes, which collect the radiofrequency or microwave radiation signals from many surrounding buildings (for 500-5000 homes or buildings) and a power transmitter to measure the energy use of individual appliances (e.g. washing machines, clothes dryers, dishwasher, etc).
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE). Exposure to electromagnetic radiation is expressed in units of microwatts per centimeter squared.
Each SmartMeter contains two antennas whose combined time averaged public safety limit of exposure is 655 µW/cm2 (Sage, 2011). The California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) Report did not account for the frequency of transmissions, reflection factors, banks of SmartMeters firing simultaneously, and distances closer than three feet.
SmartMeters emit frequencies almost continuously, day and night, seven days a week. Furthermore, it is not possible to program them to not operate at 100% of a duty cycle (continuously) and therefore it should not be possible to state that SmartMeters do not exceed the time-averaged exposure limit.
Additionally, exposure is additive and consumers may have already increased their exposures to radiofrequency radiation in the home through the voluntary use of wireless devices such as cell and cordless phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), wireless routers for internet access, home security systems, wireless baby surveillance (baby monitors) and other emerging devices.
There is a large body of research on the health risks of EMFs. SmartMeters, depending on conditions, can exceed the whole body radiation exposure of cell phones phones (see Attachment B1, Figure 4). Most research carried out by independent non-government or non-industry affiliated researchers suggests potentially serious effects from many non-ionizing radiation exposures.
Research funded by industry and some governments seems to cast doubt on the potential for harm. (Genuis, 2011). Evidence is accumulating on the results of exposure to RF at non-thermal levels including increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier in the head (Eberhardt, 2008), harmful effects on sperm, double strand breaks in DNA which could lead to cancer genesis (Phillips, 2011), stress gene activation indicating an exposure to a toxin (Blank, 2011), and alterations in brain glucose metabolism (Volkow, 2011).
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS). In the 1950's, various centers in Eastern Europe began to describe and treat thousands of workers, generally employed in jobs involving microwave transmission. The afflicted individuals often presented with symptoms such as headaches, weakness, sleep disturbance, emotional instability, dizziness, memory impairment, fatigue, and heart palpitations.
Estimated at 1.5% of the population of Sweden (Hilleert et al, 2002), 3.2% in California (Levallios et al, 2002), and 8% in Germany (infas Institut fur angewandte Sozialwissenschaft GmbH, 2003). There is objective evidence to support the EHS diagnosis, defining pathophysiological mechanisms including immune dysregulation in vitro, with increased production of selected cytokines and disruption and dysregulation of catecholamine physiology (Genuis, 2011). A double-blind research study concluded that "EMF hypersensitivity can occur as a bona fide environmentally-inducible neurological syndrome (McCarty et al, 2011).
The FCC guidelines are thermally based, and are believed to protect against injury that may be caused by acute exposures that result in tissue heating or electric shock and they do not address the risk of many chronic diseases that the public is most concerned about such as cancer, miscarriage, birth defects, semen quality, autoimmune diseases, etc. When it comes to nonthermal effects of RF, FCC guidelines are irrelevant.
In the US there are no current, relevant public safety standards for pulsed RF radiation involving chronic exposure of the public, nor of sensitive populations, nor of people with metal and medical implants that can be affected both by localized heating and by electromagnetic interference (EMI) for medical wireless implanted devices.
Many other countries (9) have significantly lower RF/MW exposure standards ranging from 0.001 to 50 µW/cm2 as compared with the US guideline of 200 -1,000 µW/cm2. Note that these recommended levels are considerably lower that the approximately 600 µW/cm2 (time-averaged) allowed by FCC guidelines for the RF radiation from SmartMeters operating in the low 900 MHz band that are based on only thermal consideration.
SmartMeter exposure is: 1) universal exposure 2) involuntary exposure.
Governmental agencies for protecting public health and safety should be much more vigilant towards involuntary environmental exposures because governmental agencies are the only defense against such involuntary exposure"
Gibt es hier vielleicht eine/n Interessenten/in, der/die Lust hat, das ganze in eine Übersetzermaschine zu stecken und auf deutsch hier reinzusetzen?
Ich kann leider nicht so lange am Computer sitzen...
Stell Dir vor, es gibt Funk, und keiner nutzt ihn :-D
Vermont towns reject smart meters: Bennington, Dorset, Manchester, and Sandgate
vote against rollout in landslide
Posted By Press Release On March 7, 2012 @ 9:15 pm In Press Releases | 8 Comments
Contact: Jesse Mayhew, Campaign Manager
During Town Meeting Day, March 6, 2012 four Vermont towns expressed their concerns about the pending rollout by voting against smart meter implementation in their respective communities. The towns of Bennington, Manchester, Dorset, and Sandgate all overwhelmingly chose to reject smart meter rollouts. Although the votes were nonbinding, their outcome is the latest sign Vermonters are becoming increasingly concerned about the impacts smart meters have on their health, privacy, and security.
“These results come from communities where the roll-out has already begun or is set to begin soon. We are not surprised by these results because it is clear that as Vermonters learn more about wireless smart meters, the less they want them in their community,” Said Wake Up Opt Out Campaign Manager Jesse Mayhew.
Manchester resident and Wake Up Opt Out campaign member Tina Victor said there were three main reasons why residents voted against the meters, “Vermonters are voting against smart meters because they are concerned about their privacy, worried about health implications, and think the whole process has been rushed without enough public input or awareness.”
Victor continued, “It is our hope that these votes and recent public opposition to smart meters is enough to get our elected officials and regulators to stop listening to the utilities and start listening to the people’s concerns.”
The Wake Up Opt Out Campaign said the votes were the latest evidence that this is a growing and important issue for Vermonters,.
“We’ve seen the traffic to our website grow everyday since its launch. We’ve seen the number of letters to the editor in local papers swell. And now we see four towns directly express their concern. It’s very clear this is becoming a much larger issue, and is likely just the beginning of Vermonters speaking out.”
Mayhew continued, “It is also worth pointing out that no towns that discussed smart meters voted in their favor.”
Summary of Results:
• Bennington – Voice Vote for “One year moratorium on installation of smart meters” – broad support with only a “few nays” reported.
• Dorset – Australian ballot to “oppose installation of wireless smart meters” – 292 in favor, 197 against.
• Manchester – Floor vote to “Oppose the installation of wireless smart meters” – 94 in favor, 48 against.
• Sandgate – Floor vote to have Select Board write letter of opposition – 54 in favor, 0 against (unanimous)
Mayhew encourages concerned Vermonters seeking further information on Smart Meters to visit the campaign’s website at Wake Up Opt Out
Stell Dir vor, es gibt Funk, und keiner nutzt ihn :-D
Ein austauschen gegen einen anderen Zähler ist hier bei uns nicht möglich.
Die Energieunternehmen bestimmen was für ein Zähler installiert wird und ein austauschen wird nur durch diese auch gemacht.
Es sei man hat genügend Geld um vor Gericht zu gehen und zu klagen.
Hört sich zwar gut an in dem Video, aber bei uns sieht es doch anders aus.
Wobei das alles schon gesetztlich abgesegnet ist.
Ich hab schon ein Smartzähler im Keller, der aber nicht strahlt.
Noch nicht, aber meine Abschirmung wird das schon unterdrücken.
Es sei das das powerlan angewendet wird, dann haben wir die Ars...Karte gezogen, denn dagegen können wir kaum was machen.
ich würde mir den Smart Meter gar nicht erst einbauen lassen. Ich lasse mich zu den täglichen Giften und HAARP nicht auch noch durch eine Mikrowellenwaffe im Haus, krank machen lassen. Und wenn ich dafür vor Gericht gehen müßte...
Aber ich habe es so verstanden, dass dem Paket, mit dem analogen Austauschgerät ein Dokument beigepackt ist, worin auch Gesetzestexte stehen. Niemand muß sich verstrahlen lassen...
Und es soll geschehen: wer den Namen des Herrn anrufen wird, der soll gerettet werden. Apg. 2,21