Reasons To Say No To Smart Meters

1
REASONS TO SAY NO
TO SMART METERS
Nov. 7, 2017
SMART METERS HARM

HEALTH
Center for Electrosmog Prevention, a California 501c3 nonprofit corporation www.electrosmogprevention.org

American Coalition Against Smart Meters (ACASM) www.causes.com/acasm
An Educational Resource Packet to read and share with everyone you know and as a presentation packet for city and county
governments. Please, go out and educate!
Updated on Nov. 7, 2017
; 2
REASONS TO SAY NO TO SMART METERS:

1. Experts are saying smart meters are unsafe, harmful to the environment, and often inaccurate. They can interfere
with personal privacy and security. This packet will explain some of the reasons why smart meters should never be
installed and why existing ones should be removed.
2. Landmark developments in 2011-2017 concerning radiofrequency radiation exposures: a. WHO determines rf

radiation a significant cancer risk - placed in same category as a potential carcinogen along with leaded gasoline, DDT, exhaust,
chlordane, and chloroform.1 b. Landmark smart meter opt-out legal case won in Maine, setting precedent for nation.2 c.
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) calls on governments to take all reasonable measures to
reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields.3 d. California Public Utility Commission orders all public gas & electric utilities to offer
an opt-out to customers who wish to have an electromechanical analog meter rather than a smart meter (May, 2012). Fees for smart
meter opt-out were socialized and capped (eliminated) at three years (2014). e. State of VT passes legislation to allow free opt-outs4
state-wide. f. Hundreds, perhaps by this time, thousands of utilities in the USA and beyond decide either not to install smart meters
due to public outcry or allow opt-outs5. Many states have opt-outs at this writing.
By 2011, 42 California municipalities, including 8 counties, had criminalized the installation of, banned or taken
out resolutions against smart meters, with more each successive week.6 These responsive city councils and county
supervisors had very good reasons for their decisions, reviewed by their attorneys.
Public Outcry CA Opt-Outs Costly (2012) Reduced-cost opt-out accomplished in CA (2014): The
CPUC demanded a public smart meter opt-out plan from giant utility Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) to stem
the tide of increasing health complaints against smart meters.7 PG&E has delivered a plan that will cost
1
IARC, WHO (5.31.11), http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/position-statements/156-who-iarc-emf-carcinogenic-news
2
http://www.skeltontaintorabbott.net/news/85/77/Skelton-Taintor-Abbott-Wins-Landmark-Smart-Meter-Case.html
3
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) (5.27.11), http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/position-statements/153-pace
4
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/vermont-legislature-bans-smart-meter-opt-out-fees/
5
http://www.stopsmartmetersbc.com/wp-content/uploads/OPT-OUT-FEES.pdf
6
http://stopsmartmeters.org/how-you-can-stop-smart-meters/ca-local-governments-on-board/
7
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smartmeter-facts/96-opt-out-plan

Available for use in the public domain under the Center for Electrosmog Prevention Disclaimer
; 3
consumers more to avoid the harmful meters, costing consumers up to $500 each, in the first year.8 Some said
the PG&E proposal sounded like: Pay us and we wont harm you. Regarding safety: First and foremost,
forcing an unsuspecting population to receive unhealthful exposures has been called irresponsible and
deplorable.
Opt-Out Accomplished Throughout CA for Investor-run, major utilities PG&E, So CA Gas, So CA Edison, and
SDG&E (2012). In San Diego County, UCAN, a local utility watchdog nonprofit, initiated a proceeding for a plan with
SDGE to allow consumers to pay more to avoid the smart meters, due to many complaints ranging from health to
overcharging and inaccuracies.9 With the participation of Center for Electrosmog Prevention (CEP), a CA 501c3
nonprofit, representing utility customers in Southern CA and beyond, in addition to several other nonprofit
organizations in CA and individuals, after several years of proceedings, CPUC approved a paid smart meter opt-out
plan for all of California, despite protests against fees. Further proceedings adopted the multiple proposals of CEP for
utilities to estimate customer energy usage every other month to lower opt-out costs and provide consumers with a free
opt-out, though the CPUC adopted this proposal with a free opt-out (socializing costs across the customer base) only
after an initial three years of payments of $75/$10 initial fee and $10/$5 monthly for meter-reading.
3. The following is but a small sample of findings over the past decade. For more information on the health risks of
smart meters, according to scientists, click here.
o Sep 20, 2017 (Update) 234 scientists who published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields (EMF)
and biology or health, from 41 nations including 33 from the U.S., have signed the International EMF Scientist
Appeal. The signers of this Appeal are strongly concerned about the global public health concerns to all living
beings on the planet, related to exposure to electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs), including radiofrequency
radiation emitted by wireless devices including wireless [smart] utility meters and are urging world health
organizations and the United Nations to take action.
Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below
most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in
harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning
8
http://www.baycitizen.org/pge/story/pges-plan-smartmeters-opt-out-pay/
9
http://www.ucan.org/energy/electricity/advanced_metering/ucan_puc_smart_meters_shouldnt_be_forced_upon_sdge_customers

; 4
and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage
goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.
(International EMF Scientist Appeal) Learn more at https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal
o (May, 2016) A 25 million dollar, two year, extensive federal study by the US Toxicology Program just
concluded, finds microwave radiofrequency radiation the same type emitted by wireless devices such as smart
meters and cell phones causes cancer in lab animals, with a dose-response relationship.
o Dr. Martin L. Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences Washington State University
has determined how even low levels of EMFs damage cells.
Smart meters should be abolished because they use short high-intensity pulses of microwave radiation. We
know from the nanosecond pulse studies can be very damaging and act via VGCC activation, with activation
continuing long after the pulse has ceased (7). It has been known for over 30 years that short microwave pulses
can cause massive cellular damage (57). Until we have some biological measures of smart meter effects, it is
foolhardy in my view to continue using them. (Dr. Martin Pall, Microwave Electromagnetic Fields Act by
Activating Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels, 2014)10
o The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM)11 12, comprised of nearly 400 physicians in the
United States with expertise in environmental exposures and health, are treating many thousands of patients with
health conditions brought on by exposure to smart meters. These observations are supported by a growing body of
scientific studies proving, irrefutably, that smart meter exposure is extremely harmful to health.
The AAEM has received a case series submitted by Dr. Federica Lamech, MBBS, Self-Reporting of Symptom
Development from Exposure to Wireless Smart Meters Radiofrequency Fields in Victoria. AAEM supports this
research. It is a well documented 92 case series that is scientifically valid. It clearly demonstrates adverse
health effects in the human population from smart meter emissions.
10
http://stopsmartmeters.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/13-84-05-02-2014-Kate-Reese-Hurd-2-of-3-7521102474.pdf
11
http://www.aaemonline.org/aboutus.php
12
http://www.aaemonline.org/positionpapers.php

; 5
The symptoms reported in this case series closely correlate not only with the clinical findings of environmental
physicians, but also with the scientific literature. Many of the symptoms reported including fatigue, headaches,
heart palpitations, dizziness and other symptoms have been shown to be triggered by electromagnetic field
exposure under double blind, placebo controlled conditions. Symptoms in this case series also correlate with
the Austrian Medical Associations Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of EMF Related Health
Problems.
Based on the findings of this case series, AAEM calls for:
Further research regarding smart meter health effects

Accommodation for health considerations regarding smart meters.
Avoidance of smart meter EMF/RF emissions based on health considerations, including the option to
maintain analog meters.
A moratorium on smart meters and implementation of safer technology (for more info click here)
o Over 50 scientists, physicians, and experts on wireless and health signed a publicly published letter in 2012 called
Correcting the Gross Misinformation About Smart Meters13, stating that high frequency EMFs such as the
microwaves used in smart meters appear to be the most damagingMost of their biological effects, including
symptoms of electrohypersensitivity, can be seen in the damage done to cellular membranes by the loss of
structurally-important calcium ions. Prolonged exposure to these high frequencies may eventually lead to cellular
malfunction and death. Furthermore, malfunction of the parathyroid gland, located in the neck just inches from
where one holds a cell phone, may actually cause electrohypersensitivity in some people by reducing the
background level of calcium ions in the blood. RF/microwave radiation is also known to decrease the production of
melatonin, which protects against cancer, and to promote the growth of existing cancer cells.
13
http://maisonsaine.ca/sante-et-securite/electrosmog/smart-meters-correcting-gross-misinformation.html

; 6
o Smart meter radiation whole body exposures provide up to 160 times that of cell phones two orders of
magnitude higher. This disputes and negates the false claims of smart meter manufacturers and utility companies
(Hirsch). 14
o Physicians and health care providers consider the role of EMF and RF in the disease process, diagnosis and
treatment of patients."...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... It should be
noted that we are not the only species at jeopardy, practically all animals and plants may be at stake
abundant evidence [exists] that biological effects and adverse health effects are occurring at [EMR] exposure levels
hundreds to thousands of times below existing public safety standards around the world. Since scientists observe
biological effects at as low as 20 microWatts/kg, is it then really safe to irradiate humans with 2 W/kg (i.e., with
100,000 times stronger radiation!), which is the recommendation level for us? " Olle Johansson, PhD, Department
of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute (home of the Nobel Prize) (Sweden)15
o "...we are creating a potential time bomb. If smart meters are [utilized], they will contribute significantly to
our exposure and this is both unwise and unsafe." Magda Havas, PhD, Professor of Environmental & Resource
Studies, Trent University (Canada)
o [Smart Meters] use is unwise from both a public health point of view, which is where my expertise lies, but
and also from a purely short and long-term economic point of view. David O. Carpenter, MD, Director of the
Institute for Health & the Environment, Albany, NY16
o California Department of Health (2011): effects from rf radiation are supported in the literature 17
o Santa Cruz, CA Dept of Health took a strong position in 2012 against installing smart meters in that city, based on
extensive scientific evidence of likely harm, and no scientific evidence of safety. 18
14
http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/public-health-alert/smart-meters-radiation-exposure-up-to-160-times-more-than-cell-phones-hirsch/
15
Commentary on CCST report by Olle Johansson, Jan. 17, 2011 http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?p=308
16
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46947223/Dr-Carpenter-s-Comments-on-CCST-Smart-Meter-Report
17
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=3856
18
http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/stop-ca-smart-meter-news/santa-cruz-county-health-dept-health-effects-of-smart-meters/

; 7
o AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) has taken a position against smart meters, based on higher
electric rates for the retired, low-income, and elderly who are at home during peak hours - due to smart-meter-
implemented time-of-day rate hikes and pricing. AARP cites life and death choices re: use of medical equipment
and cooling during peak hours that will be impacted by smart meter rate hikes. 19
o Sierra Club - San Francisco has taken a position against smart meters, urging a one-year moratorium, based
on the precautionary principle.20
o Public Citizen (Ralph Naders consumer advocate organization) has a national campaign exposing that smart
meters dont save energy, just profit PG&Es bottom line. (EMF Safety Network)
o TURN (Utility Reform Network) supports a smart meter boycott 21, calling smart meters a dumb idea, dont
help save energy, and put your privacy at risk22.
o Scientists and Medical Professionals: Similar to cell tower exposure at close range: A wireless smart meter
produces radiofrequency microwave radiation with two antennas in approximately the same frequency range (900
MHz to 2.4 GHz) as a typical cell tower. But, depending on how close it is to occupied space within a home, a
smart meter can cause much higher RF exposures than cell towers commonly do. If a smart meter is located on a
common wall with a bedroom or kitchen rather than a garage wall, for example, the RF exposure can be the same as
being within 200 to 600 feet distance of a cell tower with multiple carriers. With both cell towers and smart meters,
the entire body is immersed by microwaves that go out in all directions, which increases the risk of overexposure to
many sensitive organs such as the eyes and testicles. Wireless smart meters typically produce atypical, relatively
potent and very short pulsed RF/microwaves whose biological effects have never been fully tested. They emit these
millisecond-long RF bursts on average 9,600 times a day with a maximum of 190,000 daily transmissions and a
peak level emission two and a half times higher than the stated safety signal, as the California utility Pacific Gas &
Electric recognized before that States Public Utilities Commission. Thus people in proximity to a smart meter are
19
http://www.aarp.org/money/budgeting-saving/info-03-2010/smart-meters-are.html
20
https://docs.google.com/viewer?
a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxub2NlbGx0b3dlcmlub3VybmVpZ2hib3Job29kfGd4OjM4YmRjM2MzMzE3ZTU1NTA
21
http://www.turn.org/article.php?id=1154
22
http://www.turn.org/article.php?id=875

; 8
at risk of significantly greater aggregate of RF/microwave exposure than with a cell phone, not to mention the
cumulative exposure received by people living near multiple meters mounted together, pole-mounted routers or
utility collector meters using a third antenna to relay RF signals from 500 to 5,000 homes.23 (Correcting the Gross
Misinformation About Smart Meters, an article published in La Maison du 21e siecle by David Carpenter, endorsed
by 54 scientists and medical professionals.)
o Based on all of the above, nationwide smart meter opt-outs are being implemented by utility companies, with
some of these ordered by legislation, state agencies, and/or municipalities.
4. Adds more electro smog and risk: Even water district smart meters would add to the intolerable, rapidly growing, current
burden of rf radiation created by utility company mesh grid smart meters, cell towers, and voluntary wireless devices.
5. Use of smart meters does not reflect use of the precautionary principle, to protect the public from possible harm.24 It is
impossible to prove safety for these meters.
6. A huge risk to public health:
o OVER 8 THOUSAND CALIFORNIANS HAVE FILED HEALTH COMPLAINTS WITH THE STATE PUBLIC
UTILITY COMMISSION (CPUC) DUE TO SMART METERS BY 2010. The Commission has received more than
8,000 complaints about [JUST] PG&E Smart Meters. Statewide, the Commission has received more than 2,000
complaints [during] two months (August 15 - October 15, 2010). Many of the complaints include health, safety and
environmental concerns (Sandi Maurer, EMF Safety Network).25
o Rf radiation is so potent that it has been developed by the military for use in warfare to harass, harm, or to
potentially kill human beings. 26
23
http://www.saferemr.com/2015/02/health-experts-caution-about-smart.html
24
Wikipedia
25
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/efile/CM/126507.pdf
26
Bioeffects of Selected Nonlethal Weapons(fn1) US Dept of the Army, US Army Intelligence and Security Command, Dec. 2006, Declassified, DA FOIA/PAD
IV

; 9
o Electro-sensitive, environmentally ill, chronically ill, and the general population are at risk to become very ill from
smart meters. Electro sensitives alone are approx. 35% of the population, with up to 3.1% in the severe range,
according to the Swedish government. That would be up to 20,000 people in just a town of 60,000.27 28
o Many are now electro and rf sensitive, though before the smart meters, they were not. There is emerging
evidence that this sort of exposure to smart meters can cause this. Those people live a life of pain and isolation.
o Children, the elderly, pregnant women, the mentally ill, people with implants and medical devices that can be interfered
with by wireless, such as cardiac pacemaker, hearing aids, and insulin pumps, are also at higher risk.29
o This is a vast segment of the population, well over 50%.
o Metal implants, dental work, and use of metal eyeglasses and jewelry such as earrings, metallic adornments and
implanted medical devices for the human body. examples include metal rim glasses, earrings, and various prostheses
(e.g., hearing aids, cochlear implants, cardiac pacemakers) may interact with the rf radiation, [causing greater
exposures and painful tissues]. Research gaps are an area of interest. (National Academies of Science, 2008, Nuclear
and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB))30
i. Some have personally experienced pain from wearing metal glasses and earrings. One environmental
physician points to the signal jumping to these and becoming secondary antennae.
ii. Those with a lot of metal dental work may make them more susceptible.31
o Biological effects from this type of rf radiation exposure are in the hundreds, and can range from subtle to very
severe. Some will be immediate and others long-term. Health effects can involve: tissue and joint pain;, headache,
inflammation, cognitive problems involving memory, concentration, behavior, and mood; ringing ears, ear pain,
27
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/119-research-studies-electric-sensitivity
28
http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/ehs.php
29
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12036
30
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12036&page=16
31
http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/medical-director-of-switzerland/

; 10
hearing loss, sleeping problems, dizziness, heart palpitations, weakness, sinus swelling and pain, facial pain.
headache, increased fatigability, diminished intellectual capabilities, dullness, partial loss of memory, decreased sexual
ability, irritability, sleepiness and insomnia, emotional instability, sweating, and hypotension, thyroid problems,
shortness of breath (dyspnea) and pains in the chest region. At low intensities effects may be subtle, impairing
performance; chronic, affecting general mental and physical health and longevity; and may also be mutagenic,
affecting succeeding generations, changes in the blood, and DNA32. This is not a complete list. The list is approx. 200
symptoms long.
o Some smart meter recipients have experienced a constellation of at least 15 health problems. Since the smart meters
went in, they feel that the meters are literally killing them slowly and torturously, with no relief. Their physicians agree
and are very concerned. Some have fled their homes to the streets or other states.
o Independent scientists and experts increasingly warn against use of smart meters and other wireless equipment,
citing harm to children, especially.33 Multiple studies reported that the brains of young children absorb more radiation
than those of adults (deSalles 2006; Gandhi 1996; Kang 2002; Martinez-Burdalo 2004; Wang 2003; Wiart 2008),
potentially rendering them more vulnerable to brain tumors (NRC 2008b).
o Scientists are directly warning us about even low levels of rf radiation, especially for chronic exposures.34
o Increasingly, epidemiologic and other studies are showing associations with cancer and exposure to rf radiation. Rf
radiation is listed as a potential carcinogen by the Presidents Task Force on Cancer. Physicians are increasingly
diagnosing brain cancers as being from exposure to rf radiation.35 The wireless frequencies used are associated with
many biological effects, such as: DNA strand breakage and inability to repair; and leakage of the blood brain barrier,
cognitive dysfunction, hearing and vision damage, inflammation, immunological and neurological problems.36 Many of
these would not be felt till too late. The remark I have a smart meter and feel nothing would not mean there is no
harm.
32
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/104-bioeffects-microwave-radiation
33
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/81-seletun-scientific-statement-article
34
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/position-statements/79-seletun-scientific-statement
35
http://www.schoolmoldhelp.org/images/stories/CarpenterfinalCCST.pdf
36
http://www.ccst.us/projects/smart/documents/public_health_&_wireless_tech.pdf

; 11
o On the Smart Meter Dangers educational and scientific website, www.smartmeterdangers.org, at least 6,000 peer-
reviewed studies on rf radiation are listed (with 5,000 in a searchable database) that show biological effects, including
infertility.37
7. Electrosmog the electromagnetic radiation such as that from smart meters can cause severe damage to all life on
earth, due to impacting key components of the web of life. Studies show major harm to honeybee populations 38 and
tadpoles 39 from similar electromagnetic radiation exposures.
8. Current standards are not equivalent to safety.
o SERIOUS BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS ARE SHOWN IN MULTIPLE PEER-REVIEWED STUDIES AT 1/1000 TH

AND 1/500TH OF THE FCC STANDARD.40
o WHO (World Health Organization) has been criticized for not applying the precautionary principle to its
position on electromagnetic radiation exposures. Uncertain indications of risk are ignored or played down.41
o The FCC standard for rf radiation is currently under review. It caters to industry, allowing 500 times the rf exposures
compared to more protective countries.
o The FCC standards are scientifically obsolete, crafted twenty years ago, and did not take into account a mesh network
or all frequencies now used involving a forced chronic exposure with the presence of pulsed rf radiation. FCCs own
informational sheet bioeffects and radiofrequency was last published in 1999 - 12 years ago - and has not kept up with
the science.42
37
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research
38
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/131-honeybee-cell-phone-radiations
39
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/132-tadpoles-electrosmog
40
http://www.vws.org/documents/16DrMagdaHavas_WiFi51pgs_000.pdf
41
http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/133-who-failure-precautionaryprinciple
42
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf

; 12
o Our safety is not protected by the FCC or any government agency in this area. All share the same problems cited above,
all are obsolete and cater to industry.
o FCC is not a health authority. It claims to get advice from US EPA on rf radiation, but US EPA does not oversee this
area anymore, not since the mid-90s, when it was taken from them shortly after their scientists pointed to concerns
over rf radiation and need for more studies.
o Certain (microwave) frequencies of rf radiation are more harmful, and these are the ones used by smart meters
o See How to Identify and Reduce Electrosmog http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/smart-meter-resources-

links/safety-guidelines-for-rf-exposure/ for more information.
9. Studies citing safety of rf radiation for smart meters are flawed, insider reports.
o The so-called study cited by CPUC, HWD, and SDG&E is from Tell Associates, paid for by PG&E. It is not peer-
reviewed nor scientific, it is only an industry paid report that minimizes risk. 43
o The heavily criticized review called Health Impacts of Radiofrequencies from Smart Meters by CCST cited often by
CPUC, HWD, and SDG&E, according to its critics, reflects heavy use of Tell report, misleading data44 and industry-
generated information.
o CCST has been criticized for ignoring invited data45 that did not suit industry perspectives and not comparing apples to
apples.
43
Tell,R.(2008) Supplemental Report on An Analysisof Radiofrequency Fields Associated with Operation of the PG&E Smart Meter Program Upgrade System,Prepared for Pacific Gas & Electric
Company, Richard Tell Associates, Inc., October 27.
44
Tell,R.(2008) Supplemental Report on An Analysisof Radiofrequency Fields Associated with Operation of the PG&E Smart Meter Program Upgrade
System,Prepared for Pacific Gas & Electric Company, Richard Tell Associates, Inc., October 27.
45
http://www.magdahavas.com/2011/01/18/havas-report-on-smart-meters-for-ccst/

; 13
o CA Division of Rate Payer Advocates (California Public Utilities Commission) heavily criticized the CCST review
for inadequate reporting in a scathing 4-page commentary46
o A review of the Tell report used by CCST found full body radiation from smart meters to be up to 160 x that of a cell
phone47 (Dan Hirsch, Leader of Committee to Bridge the Gap, whistleblower for the nuclear industry).
o Nearly all formal comments made about the CCST report are negative, by independent physicians, scientists, and
experts in the field.48 Read them. http://www.ccst.us/projects/smart2/
o CCST has conflicts of interest with the US DOE, an agency that funded & approved many of the smart meter
programs.49
o No independent health, safety, or environmental impact studies have been conducted on smart meters. This was
waived by the CPUC, with thousands saying it has caused grave damages to the people of California.
10. People are and will be exposed by smart utility meters in their homes, on the sidewalks, in their yards, in their daily
activities, as studies show environmental factors influence emission strength, including the geometry of the home and
reflective surfaces like mirrors.50
11. Wireless smart meters constantly transmit pulsed digital microwave radiation (RF) 24/7, up to 22,500 pulses per
day. PG&E minimizes the transmitting time stating its only 45 seconds per day, however these pulses are between 2-20
millisecond bursts. In addition this duty cycle does not include what the Smart Meters are further intended for- wireless
data transmission for new RF enabled appliances. (EMF Safety Network)
12. Cindy Sage, coeditor of The Bioinitiative Report (2012) (www.bioinitiativereport.org) states that "wireless smart meters are
unique in that they transmit 24/7 without shut off and without relief. Humans can recover from significant adversity and
stress, but 24/7 pulsed transmissions from wireless smart meters dominates the sleep time for human recovery, and the
46
http://www.dra.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C5CBD825-1698-45DA-BFF8-7EF4E0251EDE/0/DRACommentsonCCSTReportJan302011.pdf
47
http://eon3emfblog.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/110212_GBG-on-Smart-Meters.pdf
48
http://www.ccst.us/projects/smart2/
49
http://www.ccst.us/ccstinfo/affiliates/sandia.php
50
Sage, 2011

; 14
pulsed signal radiation from the wireless meters dominates the natural bio-electronic communications originating in the
brain. " http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page_id=282
13. Smart meters are an experiment on the public that violates the Nuremberg Code for experimentation if this was a
medical experiment (see next two pages). We are not lab rats for the government or utility companies. Yet we are being
treated as such, with fewer regulations. One US DOE- approved grant for Southern California Edisons smart grid project
in Irvine describes the smart grid project in Irvine as a living laboratory, which many find offensive and frightening,
considering people are reporting harm and no one is stopping the experiment.51
14. If utilized, smart meters will cost the rate payers more money, as they are more likely to overbill customers; will have
to be removed, ultimately, and will cause the utility to suffer expensive legal claims for injuries.
15. Smart meters have been implicated in a significant number of house fires and explosions.52 A whistleblower in
Northern California described hasty, shoddy installations by poorly trained temporary help that led to arcing and sparks. 53
16. Smart meters are said by some scientists to be harmful to plant life. Plants are reported to dying in front of some single
meters or banks of smart meters.54 55
17. It is impossible to guarantee safety for these meters. Too much evidence exists. Further deployment would be
irresponsible.
18. Citizens of every town, city, county, state, and country will long remember whether their elected officials protected
or harmed them by their decisions and actions.
SAY NO TO RADIATION. SAY NO TO SMART METERS.

SAY YES TO HEALTHY ENVIRONMENTS.
51
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/pages/RecipientProjectSummary508.aspx?AwardIdSur=99423&AwardType=Grants Southern
CA Edison Grant DE-OE0000199 $39,621,208.00
52
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?page_id=1280
53
http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/01/26/stop-smart-meters-exclusive-interview-with-a-wellington-energy-whistleblower/
54
http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/04/08/shrubs-dont-lie/
55
http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/12/02/smart-meter-kills-plant/

; 15
The Nuremberg Code
From Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2,
Nuremberg, October 1946, April 1949. (Washington, DC)
The great weight of the evidence before us is to the effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings,
when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The
protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments
yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree,
however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts.
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be
able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress,
overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of
the elements of the subject matter involved as to be enable him to make an understanding and enlightened
decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental
subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method
and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the
effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates,
directs, or engages in the experiment.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods
or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

; 16
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of
the natural history of the disease or other problems under study that the anticipated results will justify the
performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will
occur; except perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the
problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against
even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care
should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if
he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any
stage, if he has probable cause to believe in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement
required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the
experimental subject.


Reasons To Say No To Smart Meters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reasons To Say No To Smart Meters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

SMART METERS HARM

Center for Electrosmog Prevention, a California 501c3 nonprofit corporation www.electrosmogprevention.org