Italian Court Orders Public Safety Campaign

Italian Court Orders Public Safety Campaign

Must Begin by July 16;
Government Will Not Appeal Decision

January 16, 2019

In a victory for advocates of precaution, an Italian court has ordered the government to launch a campaign to advise the public of the health risks from mobile and cordless phones.

The information campaign must begin by July 16.

The court in Rome reached its decision last November, but the announcement was only made yesterday. The decision is here.

Today, the government announced that it would not appeal the ruling, Stefano Bertone, an attorney based in Turin, told Microwave News. Bertone is one of the lawyers representing a group called APPLE, which sought to force the government to act. APPLE is the acronym for the Association for the Prevention and Fight Against Electrosmog.

In a joint press release, three different ministries acknowledged that there was a need to raise awareness about how to safely use mobile phones.

Story from La Repubblica is here, 
and from Corriere della Sera here.

 

https://microwavenews.com/short-takes-archive/italian-decision-precaution

Advertisements

Letter: Ready to stand up to Berger on meters

Letter: Ready to stand up to Berger on meters

photo

Day after day, he refuses to do his job. Last year, it was cable TV prices. My group, the media and the public hammered him for months, but he never lifted a finger. Then it was his arguing with the county. But he never apologized! Pure narcissism.

Now it’s Smart Meters: A month ago AEP, and a couple of days ago the water department (only a tyrant would send a notice on Christmas Eve).

For those who don’t know:

1. Smart meters can be very hazardous to your health, especially children and babies. I think it’s because of their thin skulls and skin, which allows the pulses to damage their brain functions/development. With autism and other issues at records, children do not need any more enemies. But senior citizens have reported injuries, too. Plus, a large number of studies have shown at least a causal link to cancer and degenerative diseases.

2. I don’t recall any public meetings held for input whether we wanted these.

3. The privacy issue should bother everybody. It’s just more spying.

And the reliability of these meters is horrible, with over 72,000 complaints of run-away water bills in Cleveland alone.

Considering all the problems, we the people should not have to put up with these smart meters. Just say no! Let’s all get up and make some noise. We need to stop this.

Ned Bushong

Lima

https://www.limaohio.com/opinion/letters/334428/letter-ready-to-stand-up-to-berger-on-meters

OREGON-Coos County Commissioners reject smart meter ordinance

Coos County Commissioners reject smart meter ordinance

Smart Meters

A Smart Meter on display Nov. 8 during a Pacific Power workshop at the Mill Casino-Hotel in North Bend.

COOS COUNTY — Coos County Commissioners voted against a proposed smart meter ordinance Tuesday night that would protect residents from excessive utility charges from electric service providers.

In response to a growing number of concerned citizens, the board listened to about 28 public comments from residents throughout the county all in opposition of Pacific Power’s smart meter rollout.

The ordinance, 19-01-004L, prohibited electric service providers from imposing economic hardship through its reading or reporting methods on its customers who choose to keep their analog or non-radio frequency digital meters.

Community members raised their concerns regarding the meter’s health and safety risks throughout the night echoing its radio-frequency, RF, emissions and fire hazards as top indicators it’s installation should be stopped.

A few commenters also expressed their uneasiness with meters by alleging it possesses surveillance capabilities that would allow it to listen in on occupants and impend on people’s privacy.

Pacific Power representatives were also in attendance answering questions in regards to smart meters. Among them, Corey Estlund, a field support manager, addressed much of the safety concerns regarding meters assuring citizens that the meters they use are far more advanced than the first generation meters.

He said the meters they use now are from a different vendor than the ones involved in the Portland General Electric recall in which over 70,000 smart meters were returned due to fire hazard. Estlund also pointed out the low RF levels set below the regulated limits by the Federal Communications Commission.

In a split 2-1 vote, Commissioners John Sweet and Melissa Cribbins declined to second a motion set forth by Commissioner Bob Main to approve the ordinance and move forward with its adoption.

The board discussed a similar Josephine County ordinance, which was approved in October, that also prohibited charging customers excessive rates for opting out of smart meters.

The state of Oregon is currently suing Josephine County over that ordinance citing its commissioners have no authority over deciding utility rates, which is actually regulated by the Oregon Public Utility Commission.

In that discussion, Cribbins pointed out the Association of Oregon Counties (AOC), which she currently sits on the board of, has plans to file a motion to intervene in that case.

“We have limited resources that we have to decide where to best allocate them,” Cribbins said. “If somebody else is already answering my question I can’t see a good reason why Coos County should use their limited legal assets to pay those bills which would require outside counsel.”

According to Cribbins, she declined to pass the ordinance in an effort to reduce the county’s risk in being involved in another possible lawsuit and deferred AOC to take the lead and represent the county’s interests.

The proposed ordinance also required providers to supply digital broadcasting, non-broadcasting, non-radio frequency digital and computerized analog reading and reporting methods as they sought fit.

In December, Pacific Power began its installation of about 25,000 smart meters in Coos County. An opt-out fee was established of $36 for customers interested in keeping their analog or non-radio frequency digital meter. So far, about 18,000 smart meters have been installed.

 

https://theworldlink.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/coos-county-commissioners-reject-smart-meter-ordinance/article_d7634324-c7a7-5d2b-bf3c-b4f4b7d6ef22.html

Letter: Stop smart meter extortion

Letter: Stop smart meter extortion

Pacific Power is installing “smart” meters in Clatsop County, beginning in Astoria, presenting them as a necessary upgrade, whether we want them or not.

It seems choice is not an option, unless you’ve got $432 extra ($36 a month) to burn every year to keep your old meter; installing their new meter is free (bit.ly/2QrXsZI). This amounts to no choice at all. Take it or take it.

The Oregon Public Utility Commission is allowing Pacific Power to charge this exorbitant opt-out fee in direct violation of existing Oregon state laws, and we need to reverse them. California utility customers are charged $10 a month for the first three years only, with financial assistance available.

Why opt out? Fires in the U.K. have been caused by these meters (bit.ly/2RBT1jC), which have 160 times more cumulative whole body radiation exposure than cell phones (bit.ly/2C3CdYZ), well-documented health problems from radiation in homes, businesses and schools, inaccuracy and overcharges, loss of local family-wage jobs and potential repair and power outage delays due to short-staffing — these are some reasons.

Because these meters monitor every “smart” device inside the building, your “smart” phone can turn your refrigerator on and off anytime, from anywhere. So can Pacific Power. Or a hacker.

For our health, jobs, basic freedoms and property rights, we need real choice without penalty: To opt out without prohibitive surcharges. Our city councils, our county commissioners and our state representatives should all support us in this basic right.

CHRISTOPHER PADDON

https://www.dailyastorian.com/opinion/letters/letter-stop-smart-meter-extortion/article_02acee96-11ed-11e9-9d8d-9798312182d6.html

FEATURED: Utility Meter Update 2019 JERRY DAY VIDEO: 17 minutes

FEATURED: Utility Meter Update 2019 JERRY DAY VIDEO: 17 minutes

Published on Jan 13, 2019   EXCELLENT

Your utility meter may be killing you. The people who make and install those meters know that. If you plan to not get hurt, you need information. You need to put aside trust of institutions, belief in the system. If you are not aware of what your utility company is really doing, this video will open your eyes. If you are following the metering issues, you will find some good information, solutions and referrals here, along with some very candid and direct comments.

Radiation, fire hazard, dirty electricity, and surveillance

AWARD WINNING JOURNALIST EXPOSES WIFI DISASTER IN CANADIAN PUBLIC SCHOOL THAT INJURED DOZENS OF CHILDREN

SMART METERS EMIT THE SAME RADIATION 24 HOURS A DAY NON STOP; WHETHER POWER GRID IS RUNNING OR DOWN……SANDAURA

 

“When the schools installed the wifi, we found out that at least four children had erratic tachycardia [fast or irregular heart rate] that confounded their doctors and they were wearing heart monitors to school. The older children…told us they had blackouts in certain areas of the school.” – Rodney Palmer

AWARD WINNING JOURNALIST EXPOSES WIFI DISASTER IN CANADIAN PUBLIC SCHOOL THAT INJURED DOZENS OF CHILDREN

Published: January 9, 2019
Share | Print This

Do children have a particularly low resistance to wireless radiation? According to Rodney Palmer, many school-aged children report a negative reaction from exposure to Wifi since its introduction to public schools. These children cite headaches, irregular heart rate, and blackouts as potential reactions to the technology.

“Anyone could make the argument that you could safely spray any amount of pesticide on any person for any amount of time, although that once thought to be okay, and that’s the current government thinking with microwave radiation.” – Rodney Palmer

If you’re an adult and you want to have Wifi in your house, you can make the decision about whether you want to use a technology that may harm your health; that’s part of what it means to be free. However, the story starts to change when we talk about children.

Most parents would do anything that they can to keep their children safe, and if getting rid of Wifi at home does the job then so be it. But when children are in places where they are forced by the government to spend most of their childhood, it’s no longer up to the parents to aid their child’s health. It’s up to a bureaucracy which likely doesn’t have the same agenda as the parent. In one school’s case, they told the parents that there was no other option.

“The Simcoe County District Schools Board said no. They said the children must be exposed to Wifi at school. Even the children who were sick and presented to the school board themselves were told no, you may not plug your computer into the wall. You must sit all day in a sea of microwave radiation.”

Because of safety code 6 in Ontario, the school board does not have to acknowledge a parent’s complaint about this issue because the code considers the radiation to be completely safe. However, appropriate long-term testing has not been done to determine whether some children are affected negatively by wireless radiation.

“So, we were right! Our kids were sick at school and nowhere else. There was no mold problem, no recent renovation, chemical building materials. Only a newly installed massive WIFI system. They measured and found that radiation created by the WIFI exceeded Safety Code 6 thermal threshold by 34%. And that explained how my son came home from school with hot ears every day. He was being cooked by microwaves.

School WIFI operates at 2.4 GHz, the same frequency as a microwave oven.

So, did they shut it down?

Evacuate the school?

Did they alert the teachers? Parents? Students?

No!” [Source]

No, the Simcoe County District School Board kept it quiet. They told no one. They downplayed the results as insignificant and failed to tell the parent who were BEGGING for answers.

Unfortunately, in many western countries, children are given few options as to where their education may take place. In the UK, laws have been introduced forcing parents to pay fines of up to £120 because of their child’s tardiness to school. This type of law appears to be popping up around the world, where parents are granted littler control over the life and health of their child.

As several children have had unexplained health issues in suspicious connection with Wifi radiation, the question should not be whether we can prove for a fact that Wifi caused the incidents, but whether we should be forcing a potential danger on the world’s children just because we can’t prove for a fact that it was not.

“The ‘weight of evidence’ model is weighted in favor of science payed for by the wireless industry. As you all know, science can be manipulated, but cardiac arrest can’t.” – Rodney Palmer

THIS ARTICLE (AWARD WINNING JOURNALIST EXPOSES WIFI DISASTER IN CANADIAN PUBLIC SCHOOL THAT INJURED DOZENS OF CHILDREN) WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED AND PUBLISHED BY WAKING TIMES AND IS PUBLISHED HERE UNDER A CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE WITH ATTRIBUTION TO PHILLIP SCHNEIDER AND WAKINGTIMES.COM. IT MAY BE RE-POSTED FREELY WITH PROPER ATTRIBUTION, AUTHOR BIO, AND THIS COPYRIGHT STATEMENT.

READ MORE…

SHARE THIS ARTICLE…

Energy suppliers are still ‘bullying’ customers over smart meters even though they are not compulsory

Energy suppliers are still ‘bullying’ customers over smart meters even though they are not compulsory

  • Wording of letters used by energy providers is angering paying customers 
  • Smart meters are being installed in an ambitious Government drive to have them in every home by the end of next year

Big energy suppliers are continuing to send letters to customers ‘bullying’ them into taking out smart meters even though they are not compulsory.

The correspondence has angered some customers, who believe the wording used is at best misleading.

The latest major supplier to use such tactics is Eon. It has been firing off mailings stating in bold: ‘We need to change your meters.’

Pressure: Big energy suppliers are continuing to send letters to customers ‘bullying’ them into taking out smart meters

 

Pressure: Big energy suppliers are continuing to send letters to customers ‘bullying’ them into taking out smart meters

It then says: ‘Your electricity and gas meters are old models that we need to replace with free self-reading smart meters.’ It goes on to say: ‘We have an obligation to install smart meters for our customers.’

Smart meters are being installed in an ambitious Government drive to have them in every home by the end of next year.

He says: ‘I have seen in my work how easily electronic units can be interfered with and passwords cracked.’

Last week, Eon told The Mail on Sunday: ‘We are obliged to install smart meters for our customers as part of the Government-led nationwide upgrade. Smart meters offer a number of benefits for customers, including bringing an end to estimated bills and enabling people to gain a better understanding of their energy use.

‘While the obligation to install smart meters is mandated, we make it clear to all customers that if they do not want a smart meter at this time, they can contact us.’

Eon has now written to Ralph, confirming he has been taken off its smart meter list, thus excluding him from further smart meter marketing material. But just for six months, after which it will once again be able to bombard him with mailings urging him to have installed a meter he does not trust.

Mark Todd, co-founder of energyhelpline, says the smart meter scheme should be paused until suppliers can guarantee that only meters using the latest technology (called Smets 2) will be installed.

He says: ‘I have seen in my work how easily electronic units can be interfered with and passwords cracked.’

Last week, Eon told The Mail on Sunday: ‘We are obliged to install smart meters for our customers as part of the Government-led nationwide upgrade. Smart meters offer a number of benefits for customers, including bringing an end to estimated bills and enabling people to gain a better understanding of their energy use.

‘While the obligation to install smart meters is mandated, we make it clear to all customers that if they do not want a smart meter at this time, they can contact us.’

Eon has now written to Ralph, confirming he has been taken off its smart meter list, thus excluding him from further smart meter marketing material. But just for six months, after which it will once again be able to bombard him with mailings urging him to have installed a meter he does not trust.

Mark Todd, co-founder of energyhelpline, says the smart meter scheme should be paused until suppliers can guarantee that only meters using the latest technology (called Smets 2) will be installed.

 

Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health

This paper is referencing the harm wind turbines cause on the public.  The evidence includes SMART METER TECHNOLOGY!!!!!!..SANDAURA

Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
1
Wind turbine radio frequency/electromagnetic energy: exploring
the risk of harm to human health
December 3, 2018
By
Carmen Krogh, BScPharm (Retired)
Independent Health Researcher

1.0 This submission is public and maybe shared. It’s purpose is to:
 provide a brief overview regarding the potential risk of harm to human health
associated with radio frequency/electromagnetic (RF/EMF) energy exposure in
general and that related to operational industrial scale wind turbines (IWT);
 propose that the Ontario Government include all devices that emit RF/EMF
energy and establish RF/EMF standards which are protective of human health;
 propose that the Ontario Government IWT approval process require that in
addition to actual noise measurements related to IWT noise complaints, RF/EMF
measurements be conducted in the homes of residents who have submitted IWT
health complaints;
 urge that Ontario government health authorities, health care experts and clinicians
respond and adopt a prevention and precautionary approach to potential risk
factors associated with RF/EMF energy exposure;
 rescind the burden of proof of causality imposed on rural residents by the GEA
(Green Energy and Economy Act) with a more realistic level, i.e., one based on
environmental protection and the balance of probabilities;
 propose that the electro-sensitivity team at Women’s College Hospital be
expanded and appropriately funded to support referrals by family practice
physicians and medical specialists in order to investigate and treat patients
suspected of being negatively affected by RF/EMF exposure emitted from any
device; and
 propose that the Ontario Government convene a formal Public Inquiry to hear
testimony regarding the impact of the Green Energy Act and the subsequent
health and social outcomes experienced by many rural families.
2.0 A brief biography:
Krogh is 1) a full time volunteer and published researcher regarding potential risk of harm
(adverse health effects) associated with industrial wind energy facilities and shares
information with communities; individuals; federal, provincial and public health authorities:
wind energy developers; the industry; and others. 2) Author/co-author of peer reviewed
Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
2
articles and conference papers presented at scientific wind turbine noise conferences. 3) Peer
reviewer for a scientific journal. 4) Retired pharmacist whose career includes: senior
executive positions at a teaching hospital (Director of Pharmacy); a drug information
researcher at another teaching hospital; a Director of a professional organization; a
Consultant at the Bureau of Human Prescription Drugs (Health Canada); and Director (A) at
Health Canada (PMRA). 5) Former Director of Publications and Editor in Chief of the
Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS), the book used by physicians, nurses,
and health professionals for prescribing information in Canada.
3.0 Introduction:
The topic of human risk factors to RF/EMF energy is debated globally. However, awareness
of risk factors and electro sensitivity to RF/EMF energy is increasing. Currently, regulations
are often limited in scope and may not include all devices that emit and/or utilize RF/EMF
energy. As a result, exposure to these emissions may be higher than expected due to wide
spread use of technologies such as WiFi, other wireless systems which emit these energies.
While some authorities, physicians and researchers are expressing concerns associated with
exposure to RF/EMF energy in general, research specific to IWT is limited. However,
testimony from residents living near IWT led the Australian Select Committee on Wind
Turbines to recommend that “electromagnetic interference” be addressed [1, pg xviii].
In Ontario, concerns regarding IWT radio/electromagnetic energy are not new. During the
GEA hearings (2009), the Standing Committee was advised of IWT RF/EMF energy and
noise issues which were affecting the health of a group of impacted families [2]. Since that
time, some Ontario residents living in proximity to IWT have taken the step to test their
homes for RF/EMF energy. Some report harm they associate with the start-up of an IWT
project in proximity to their home and consider that exposure to IWT emitted noise as well as
to RF/EMF energy is negatively affecting them. As a result, residents are increasingly
consulting their physicians and other health practitioners [3].
Additional concerns relate to vulnerable population groups such as children (fetus to youth),
the elderly including those with pre-existing medical conditions, chronic disease states and
special needs. However, while it is known that these vulnerable populations are potentially at
risk of harm to noise and RF/EMF emissions in general, research specific to IWT exposure is
limited.
4.0 Risk of harm to human health
Technology-based systems are often utilized during the generation and distribution of
electricity. IWT facilities typically utilize infrastructure support such as wiring, cables,
transformer stations, communication networks, remote data monitoring capability, digital and
GIS interfaces [4,5]. Mechanisms that utilize WiFi for IWT remote monitoring and the use of
smart meters to monitor electricity usage contribute to the overall totality of these emissions.
Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
3
An Internet search reveals that authorities, professional and citizen groups have expressed
concerns relating to RF//EMF energy, A snapshot of these is briefly summarized below.
Physician Lamech (2014) conducted a study on smart meters which are typically used by
electricity utilities to monitor electrical usage data through R/F fields. Conclusions were
based on comparisons with other research and findings indicate that “symptoms were the
same as those reported by people exposed to radiofrequency fields emitted by devices other
than smart meters” [6].
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is an arm of WHO (World Health
Organization). IARC has classified RFR (Radio Frequency Radiation) and ELF (Extra Low
Frequency) as a possible carcinogen to humans [7].
The BioInitiatives working group advises there is little doubt that exposure to ELF causes
childhood leukemia [8] and the American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supported a
proposal for a “formal inquiry into radiation standards for cell phones and other wireless
products” [9]. Concerns for children have been published in Redmayne 2016 [10] as well as
in the comprehensive report published by the BioInitiatives Working Group [8].
Boardman reports that Women’s College Hospital in Toronto is the first Canadian hospital
requiring its doctors to be trained in treating the effects of these emissions [11]. Based on
personal communications, the College has a lengthy waiting list resulting in delays before a
patient can be seen [3].
5.0 Conclusions
To conclude, Ontario researchers Havas and Colling 2011 comment that symptoms from
electro hypersensitivity are consistent with IWT generated sound waves and that IWT:
… make pressure waves and electromagnetic waves. The pressure waves (or sound
waves) generated by the moving turbines can be heard as noise and/or perceived as
infrasound. The electromagnetic waves are generated by the conversion of wind
energy to electricity. This conversion produces high-frequency transients and
harmonics that result in poor power quality. These high frequencies can flow along
the wires (dirty electricity) and along the ground, thereby causing ground current.
These four types of waves—noise, infrasound, dirty electricity, and ground current—
and shadow flicker are each likely to contribute to ill health among those who live
near wind turbines [12].
Havas and Colling propose a number of recommendations on how to minimize “adverse
biological and health effects for those living near wind turbines” including the “obvious
steps” to “eliminate or reduce exposure to the agent(s) causing the illness” [12].
Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
4
BioInitiative (2012) reviewed the risks associated with RF/EMF energy exposure and
emphasize the critical importance of prevention and reducing exposure to these emissions
[8].
In an overview and summary fashion, during concerted efforts over a two year period of
time, the Wind Plant Collector System Design Working Group considered harmonics and
resonance issues associated with IWT:
This paper has presented harmonics and resonance issues for wind power plants in an
overview and summary fashion. This included an introduction to series and parallel
resonances, frequency scan analysis, and the harmonic source characteristics of
WTGs and of utility interconnections. Further, the issue of compliance with the
power quality standard IEEE Std 519 was presented, as was an overview of harmonic
filters.
Reasonably, it is understood that such studies will not always insure compliance.
No harmonic mitigation solution is ideal for every situation and accordingly post
construction harmonics monitoring may be need to determine a viable solution should
an issue arise. It should also be noted that post-commissioning harmonic
measurements might be inconclusive because it is problematic to segregate harmonic
currents caused by the wind plant from harmonic current flow into the plant as a
result of grid voltage distortion. In the worst case, failure to comply with harmonic
limits could result in a default of the terms of an LGIA, which could lead to
termination of the agreement if the default is not cured [13].
Ontario has a provision in the Health Protection and Promotion Act (HPPA) [14] to
investigate residents’ complaints. Using the provisions in the Act, an investigation should be
conducted using the already established team at the Women’s College. The Austrian Medical
Association has published a guideline for the “diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health
problems and illnesses (EMF syndrome) [15]. As well, in a medical journal McMurtry and
Krogh provide diagnostic criteria to assist physicians with diagnosing adverse health effects
associated with living in the environs of IWT [16]. Both references could be utilizeed during
such investigations.
Ontario’s GEA requires a high burden of proof during Environmental Review Tribunal
(ERT) hearings. The legislation requires that rural community residents and other
participants who wish to appeal the approval of a IWT project must prove the project “will
cause serious harm to human health” [17] prior to the start up of WT operations.
However, proof of causality is rare in health and ranks at about 95 to 99% certainty. This is
rarely possible for biological systems; the Precautionary Principle ranks at the about the 50%
medium level, consistent with civil and some administrative law; and environmental
protection has a low level of certainty (10 to 30%) [8]. The burden of proof imposed on rural
residents and communities should be adjusted to a more realistic level, i.e., one based on
environmental protection.
Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
5
Regarding the burden of proof, Goldstein (2001) comments:
…the burden of proof for potentially harmful actions by industry or government rests
on the assurance of safety and that when there are threats of serious damage,
scientific uncertainty must be resolved in favor of prevention. Yet we in public health
are sometimes guilty of not adhering to this principle [18].
WHO 1999 provides “environmental management principles on which government policies,
including noise management policies, can be based” [19]:
a. The precautionary principle. In all cases, noise should be reduced to the lowest
level achievable in a particular situation. Where there is a reasonable possibility that
public health will be damaged, action should be taken to protect public health without
awaiting full scientific proof.
b. The polluter pays principle. The full costs associated with noise pollution
(including monitoring, management, lowering levels and supervision) should be met
by those responsible for the source of noise.
c. The prevention principle. Action should be taken where possible to reduce noise
at the source. Land-use planning should be guided by an environmental health impact
assessment that considers noise as well as other pollutants.
It is proposed that the Ontario Government for the People adopt the WHO 1999
precautionary, polluter pays and prevention principals and take pro-active measures to
protect public health by:
 Acknowledging that there are some rural families experiencing adverse health effects
from living in proximity to IWT;
 Rescinding the burden of proof of causality imposed on rural residents by the GEA
with a more realistic level, i.e., one based on environmental protection and the
balance of probabilities;
 In addition to noise measurements, requiring RF/EMF energy measurements in
homes where residents are reporting adverse health effects;
 Taking action and working proactively with those residents reporting adverse health
effects in order to resolve the issues to their satisfaction;
 Establishing an independent investigative process under the HPPAct. This potentially
could be conducted by the Women’s College whereby physicians can refer patients
suspected of adverse health effects from living in proximity to IWT;
 Providing priority attention to vulnerable population groups such as children (fetus to
youth) and the elderly, including those with pre-existing medical conditions and
disease states as well as those with special needs; and
Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
6
 Convening a formal Inquiry to hear testimony from rural families regarding the
health, social and other impacts of Ontario’s Green Energy Act.

Respectfully Submitted,
Carmen Krogh, BScPharm (Retired)
Independent health researcher
Ontario
Mobile: +1 613 312 9663
Email: carmen.krogh@gmail.com

References:
1. The Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines, Final Report, August 3 2015. Commonwealth of Australia.
ISBN 978-1-76010-260-9.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Wind_Turbines/Wind_Turbines/Final_Rep
ort
2. Ripley Group. Legislative Assembly of Ontario First Session, 39th Parliament. Official Report Journal of
Debates (Hansard), Wednesday 15 April 2009. Standing Committee on Green Energy and Green Economy Act,
2009. Chair: David Orazietti. P. G-547.
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?locale=en&Date=2009-
04-15&ParlCommID=8856&BillID=2145&Business=&DocumentID=23801#P1296_397237.
3. Krogh. Personal Communications.
4.Wind Power, Monthly. GE and remote turbine monitoring.
http://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/989462/ge-remote-turbine-monitoring.
5. SCADA, ReGen POWERTECH. Wind Turbines – Operations & Maintenance, Onshore Wind Turbine,
19/07/2015. http://www.regenpowertech.com/57/scada.
6. Lamech F, Self-reporting of symptom development from exposure to radiofrequency fields of wireless smart
meters in Victoria, Australia: a case series. Altern Ther Health Med. 2014 Nov;20(6):28-39.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25478801.
7. World Health Organization. Electromagnetic fields (EMF) Health Risk Assessment, Dated 31/May/2011.
http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf.
8. BioInitiative Working Group, Cindy Sage and David O. Carpenter, Editors. BioInitiative Report: A Rationale
for Biologically-based Public Exposure Standards for Electromagnetic Radiation, December 31, 2012.
http://www.bioinitiative.org.
9. American Academy of Pediatrics. Correspondence to The Honorable Julius Genachowki, Commissioner,
Federal Communications Commission. Washington DC, July 12, 2012.
https://www.scribd.com/document/104230961/American-Academy-of-Pediatrics-letter-to-the-FCC
10, Redmayne M. International policy and advisory response regarding children’s exposure to radio frequency
electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). Taylor & Francis Online. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. Volume
35, Issue 2, Pages 176-185, 2016. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/15368378.2015.1038832.
Wind turbine radio/electromagnetic energy: exploring the risk of harm to human health
7
11. Boardman W, Electromagnetic Radiation Effects Addressed by Canadian Hospital, June 24, 2012.
http://ivn.us/2012/06/24/electromagnetic-radiation-effects-canadian-hospital/.
12. Havas M and Colling D, Wind Turbines Make Waves: Why Some Residents Near Wind Turbines Become
Ill. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society 2011 31: 414. DOI: 0.1177/0270467611417852.
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0270467611417852.
13. Harmonics and Resonance Issues in Wind Power Plants. IEEE PES Wind Plant Collector System Design
Working Group. Contributing Members: M. Bradt, B. Badrzadeh, E. Camm, D. Mueller, J. Schoene, T. Siebert,
T. Smith, M. Starke, R. Walling. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6281633
14. Ontario, Canada. Health Protection and Promotion Act (HPPA) R.S.O. 1990.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90h07_e.htm#BK13.
15. Guideline of the Austrian Medical Association for the diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health
problems and illnesses (EMF syndrome). Consensus paper of the Austrian Medical Association’s Working
Group AG-EMF. http://electromagnetichealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/EMF-Guideline.pdf.
16. Robert Y McMurtry and Carmen ME Krogh, Diagnostic criteria for adverse health effects in the environs of
wind turbines. JRSM Open 2014 5:1-5. DOI: 10.1177/2054270414554048. PMID: 25383200 [PubMed]
PMCID: PMC4221978
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Diagnostic+criteria+for+adverse+health+effects+in+the+environs
+of+wind+turbines.
17. GEA (Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009). S.O. 2009, c. 12 – Bill 150, Ontario, Canada. An Act
to enact the Green Energy Act, 2009 and to build a green economy, to repeal the Energy Conservation
Leadership Act, 2006 and the Energy Efficiency Act and to amend other statutes. Schedule G, p. 48.
https://www.ola.org/sites/default/files/node-files/bill/document/pdf/2009/2009-05/bill—text-39-1-enb150ra.
pdf.
18. Goldstein BD. The Precautionary Principle Also Applies to Public Health Actions. Am J Public Health.
2001, Sep;91(9):1358-61. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11527755.
19. WHO (1999). World Health Organization. Edited by Berglund B, Lindvall T, Schwela DH. Guidelines for
Community Noise. Part 5. Noise management.
http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsci/i/fulltext/noise/noise.pdf.

“Smart” Meter Case Taken to Arizona Supreme Court

“Smart” Meter Case Taken to Arizona Supreme Court
Information & Perspective by Warren Woodward
Sedona, Arizona ~ January 10, 2019

Last month the Court of Appeals ruled against me in my appeal of the Arizona Corporation Commission’s decision regarding Arizona Public Service Company’s “smart” meters. Among other things, that “smart” meter decision allows APS to charge customers who refuse “smart” meters an extortion fee, and it completely disallows solar and commercial customers to refuse a “smart” meter when in the past they always could.

The case was consolidated with my appeal against another decision the ACC made regarding the so-called “grandfathering” of APS’s R-Basic Large plan which is no longer available to customers even though some people are still on it. I also appealed the so-called “90-day trial period” whereby new APS customers can’t take the R-Basic rate for 90 days but instead have to be on a Demand or Time Of Use rate.

Denying certain rate plans to residential customers while other residential customers can take those rate plans is obvious discrimination. Regarding the 90-day trial period, the Court was so dumb it actually stated that there was no discrimination because new customers could choose from among all the available plans — except they can’t! If new customers could chose from all the rate plans then there wouldn’t be a 90-day trial period!

That wasn’t the only obvious error the Court made. It ignored evidence. It didn’t know what evidence was (comments at ACC open meetings are not “testimony”). It misrepresented my positions in order to make them easier to argue against (straw man fallacies). It even doctored a quote from a case citation to make the quote support the Court’s result oriented decision.

The details are in my Petition for Review to the Arizona Supreme Court which was filed there yesterday and is attached to this email.

%d bloggers like this: