Looming Health Crisis: Wireless Technology and the Toxification of America
As a multitude of hazardous wireless technologies are
deployed in homes, schools and workplaces, government officials and industry
representatives continue to insist on their safety despite growing evidence to
the contrary. A major health crisis looms that is only hastened through the
extensive deployment of “smart grid” technology.
In October 2009 at Florida Power and Light’s (FPL) solar
energy station President Barack Obama announced that $3.4 billion of the
American Reinvestment and Recovery Act would be devoted to the country’s “smart
energy grid” transition. Matching funds from the energy industry brought the
total national Smart Grid investment to $8 billion. FPL was given $200 million
of federal money to install 2.5 million “smart meters” on homes and businesses
throughout the state.[1]
By now many residents in the United States and Canada
have the smart meters installed on their dwellings. Each of these meters is
equipped with an electronic cellular transmitter that uses powerful bursts of
electromagnetic radiofrequency (RF) radiation to communicate with nearby meters
that together form an interlocking network transferring detailed information on
residents’ electrical usage back to the utility every few minutes or less. Such
information can easily be used to determine individual patterns of behavior
based on power consumption.
The smart grid technology is being sold to the public as
a way to “empower” individual energy consumers by allowing them to access
information on their energy usage so that they may eventually save money by
programming “smart” (i.e, wireless enabled) home appliances and equipment that
will coordinate their operability with the smart meter to run when electrical
rates are lowest. In other words, a broader plan behind smart grid technology
involves a tiered rate system for electricity consumption that will be set by
the utility to which customers will have no choice but to conform.
Because of power companies’ stealth rollout of smart
meters a large majority of the public still remains unaware of the dangers they
pose to human health. This remains the case even though states such as Maine
have adopted an “opt out” provision for their citizens. The devices have not
been safety-tested by Underwriters Laboratory and thus lack the UL approval
customary for most electronics.[2] Further, power customers are typically told
by their utilities that the smart meter only communicates with the power company
“a few times per day” to transmit information on individual household energy
usage. However, when individuals obtained the necessary equipment to do their
own testing they found the meters were emitting bursts of RF radiation
throughout the home far more intense than a cell phone call every minute or
less.[3]
America’s Telecom-friendly Policy for RF
Exposure
A growing body of medical studies is now linking cumulative RF exposure to DNA disruption, cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, and autoimmune diseases. Smart meters significantly contribute to an environment already polluted by RF radiation through the pervasive stationing of cellular telephone towers in or around public spaces and consumers’ habitual use of wireless technologies. In the 2000 Salzburg Resolution European scientists recommended the maximum RF exposure for humans to be no more than one tenth of a microwatt per square centimeter. In the United States RF exposure limits are 1,000 microwatts per centimeter, with no limits for long term exposure.[4] Such lax standards have been determined by outdated science and the legal and regulatory maneuvering of the powerful telecommunications and wireless industries.
A growing body of medical studies is now linking cumulative RF exposure to DNA disruption, cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, and autoimmune diseases. Smart meters significantly contribute to an environment already polluted by RF radiation through the pervasive stationing of cellular telephone towers in or around public spaces and consumers’ habitual use of wireless technologies. In the 2000 Salzburg Resolution European scientists recommended the maximum RF exposure for humans to be no more than one tenth of a microwatt per square centimeter. In the United States RF exposure limits are 1,000 microwatts per centimeter, with no limits for long term exposure.[4] Such lax standards have been determined by outdated science and the legal and regulatory maneuvering of the powerful telecommunications and wireless industries.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ceased studying
the health effects of radiofrequency radiation when the Senate Appropriations
Committee cut the department’s funding and forbade it from further research into
the area.[5] Thereafter RF limits were codified as mere “guidelines” based on
the EPA’s tentative findings and are to this day administered by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).
These weakly enforced standards are predicated on the
alleged “thermal effect” of RF. In other words, if the energy emitted from a
wireless antenna or device is not powerful enough to heat the skin or flesh then
no danger is posed to human health.[6] This reasoning is routinely put forward
by utilities installing smart meters on residences, telecom companies locating
cellular transmission towers in populated areas, and now school districts across
the US allowing the installation of cell towers on school
campuses.[7]
The FCC’s authority to impose this standard was further
reinforced with the passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act that included a
provision lobbied for by the telecom industry preventing state and local
governments from evaluating potential environmental and health effects when
locating cell towers “so long as ‘such facilities comply with the FCC’s
regulations concerning such emissions.’”[8]
In 2001 an alliance of scientists and engineers with the
backing of the Communications Workers of America filed a federal lawsuit hoping
the Supreme Court would reconsider the FCC’s obsolete exposure guidelines and
the Telecom Act’s overreach into state and local jurisdiction. The high court
refused to hear the case. When the same group asked the FCC to reexamine its
guidelines in light of current scientific studies the request was rebuffed.[9]
Today in all probability millions are suffering from a variety of immediate and
long-term health effects from relentless EMF and RF exposure that under the
thermal effect rationale remain unrecognized or discounted by the telecom
industry and regulatory authorities alike.
Growing Evidence of Health Risks From RF
Exposure
The main health concern with electromagnetic radiation emitted by smart meters and other wireless technologies is that EMF and RF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function. These are the findings of Dr. George Carlo, who oversaw a comprehensive research group commissioned by the cell phone industry in the mid-1990s.
The main health concern with electromagnetic radiation emitted by smart meters and other wireless technologies is that EMF and RF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function. These are the findings of Dr. George Carlo, who oversaw a comprehensive research group commissioned by the cell phone industry in the mid-1990s.
When Carlo’s research began to reveal how there were
indeed serious health concerns with wireless technology, the industry sought to
bury the results and discredit Carlo. Yet Carlo’s research has since been upheld
in a wealth of subsequent studies and has continuing relevance given the
ubiquity of wireless apparatuses and the even more powerful smart meters. “One
thing all these conditions have in common is a disruption, to varying degrees,
of intercellular communication,” Carlo observes. “When we were growing up, TV
antennas were on top of our houses and such waves were up in the sky. Cell
phones and Wi-Fi have brought those things down to the street, integrated them
into the environment, and that’s absolutely new.”[10]
In 2007 the BioInitiative Working Group, a worldwide body
of scientists and public health experts, released a 650-page document with over
2000 studies linking RF and EMF exposure to cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, DNA
damage, immune system dysfunction, cellular damage and tissue
reduction.[11]
In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International
Agency for Research on Cancer categorized “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields
as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a
malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless cellphone
use.”[12]
In November 2011 the Board of the American Academy of
Environmental Medicine (AAEM), a national organization of medical and
osteopathic physicians, called on California’s Public Utilities Commission to
issue a moratorium on the continued installation of smart meters in residences
and schools “based on a scientific assessment of the current available
literature.” “[E]xisting FCC guidelines for RF safety that have been used to
justify installations of smart meters,” the panel wrote,
“only look at thermal tissue damage and are obsolete,
since many modern studies show metabolic and genomic damage from RF and ELF
exposure below the level of intensity which heats tissues … 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.’”[13]
In April 2012 the AAEM issued a formal position paper on
the health effects of RF and EMF exposure based on a literature review of the
most recent research. The organization pointed to how government and industry
arguments alleging the doubtful nature of the science on non-thermal effects of
RF were not defensible in light of the newest studies. “Genetic damage,
reproductive defects, cancer, neurological degeneration and nervous system
dysfunction, immune system dysfunction, cognitive effects, protein and peptide
damage, kidney damage, and developmental effects have all been reported in the
peer‐reviewed scientific literature,” AAEM concluded.[14]
Radiating
Children
The rollout of smart meters proceeds alongside increased installation of wireless technology and cell phone towers in and around schools in the US. In 2010 Professor Magda Havas conducted a study of schools in 50 US state capitols and Washington DC to determine students’ potential exposure to nearby cell towers. A total 6,140 schools serving 2.3 million students were surveyed using the antennasearch.com database. Of these, 13% of the schools serving 299,000 students have a cell tower within a quarter mile of school grounds, and another 50% of the schools where 1,145,000 attend have a tower within a 0.6 mile radius. The installation of wireless networks and now smart meters on and around school properties further increases children’s RF exposure.[15]
The rollout of smart meters proceeds alongside increased installation of wireless technology and cell phone towers in and around schools in the US. In 2010 Professor Magda Havas conducted a study of schools in 50 US state capitols and Washington DC to determine students’ potential exposure to nearby cell towers. A total 6,140 schools serving 2.3 million students were surveyed using the antennasearch.com database. Of these, 13% of the schools serving 299,000 students have a cell tower within a quarter mile of school grounds, and another 50% of the schools where 1,145,000 attend have a tower within a 0.6 mile radius. The installation of wireless networks and now smart meters on and around school properties further increases children’s RF exposure.[15]
Many school districts that are strapped for cash in the
face of state budget cuts are willing to ignore the abundance of scientific
research on RF dangers and sign on with telecom companies to situate cell towers
directly on school premises. Again, the FCC’s thermal effect rule is invoked to
justify tower placement together with a disregard of the available
studies.
The School District of Palm Beach County, the eleventh
largest school district in the US, provides one such example. Ten of its
campuses already have cell towers on their grounds while the district ponders
lifting a ban established in 1997 that would allow for the positioning of even
more towers. When concerned parents contacted the school district for an
explanation of its wireless policies, the administration assembled a document,
“Health Organization Information and Academic Research Studies Regarding the
Health Effects of Cell Tower Signals.” The report carefully selected
pronouncements from telecom industry funded organizations such as the American
Cancer Society and out-of-date scientific studies supporting the FCC’s stance on
wireless while excluding the long list of studies and literature reviews
pointing to the dangers of RF and EMF radiation emitted by wireless networks and
cell towers. [16]
The Precautionary Principle /
Conclusion
Surrounded by the sizable and growing body of scientific literature pointing to the obvious dangers of wireless technology, utility companies installing smart meters on millions of homes across the US and school officials who accommodate cell towers on their grounds are performing an extreme disservice to their often vulnerable constituencies. Indeed, such actions constitute the reckless long term endangerment of public health for short term gain, sharply contrasting with more judicious decision making.
Surrounded by the sizable and growing body of scientific literature pointing to the obvious dangers of wireless technology, utility companies installing smart meters on millions of homes across the US and school officials who accommodate cell towers on their grounds are performing an extreme disservice to their often vulnerable constituencies. Indeed, such actions constitute the reckless long term endangerment of public health for short term gain, sharply contrasting with more judicious decision making.
No comments:
Post a Comment