OPINION: Unsatisfactory Science from LPEA, Part Two

OPINION: Unsatisfactory Science from LPEA, Part Two

If you haven’t already done so (in Part One) you can click here to download the letter I received from La Plata Electric Association (LPEA) — my electric cooperative — two months after submitting a list of questions regarding smart meters.

We know that the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned us about possible serious illnesses being caused by over-exposure to EMF (electromagnetic frequencies.) These illnesses are, for the time being, classified as symptoms of what is called “Electrical Hypersensitivity Syndrome” (EHS).

WHO also classified EMF radiation as a class 2B “possible cancer causing agent.”

We also know that the smart meters recently installed in the homes of unsuspecting customers by La Plata Electric Association are sources of EMF radiation.

Gary Duncan, PhD in physics, has written, “This is, however, the tip of the iceberg… the evidence resulting from immune suppressions, psychological disorders, brain damage, sexual function disruption, sleep loss… the list goes on… is overwhelming, even for the minimally informed. The point does not hang on either/or, it is that LPEA has arbitrarily and in the light of severe contradictory evidence, taken away the rights of choice in health and safety from every consumer. Their arguments weaken with every outpouring, and are now translucent to the point of being ludicrous.”

In his responses (after a two month delay) to my series of questions regarding smart meters, LPEA engineer Ron Meier claimed that the WHO 2B classification was based on inconclusive studies on RF from cell phones, and isn’t as broad as some have taken it to be.

How does LPEA know that, since they didn’t even recognize the correct classification in the first place? And since RF dose from cell phones has been proven to be far less than the RF dose being delivered by smart meters, their explanation seemingly holds no water.

LPEA la plata electric pagosa springs colorado smary meters controversy

LPEA never fully answered my questions — not because my questions were invalid, but because they can’t answer them. For this reason alone these meters must be removed ASAP using the precautionary principle — if there is a possibility of harm, don’t do it.

How much is the extreme dose variation from each meter?
How will each individual person react physically?
What is the dose each person is getting as an individual?
How much is too much for each person as an individual?

Saying that smart meters are on a different frequency than cell phones is a meaningless response, probably geared to make us wonder if a different frequency changes the whole spectrum of harm. Hasn’t LPEA claimed that smart meters are “no more dangerous than cell phones?” Which is it? According to WHO, both are equally dangerous; both are class 2B carcinogens, at the very least.

In his letter, Mr. Meier directed me to a copied enclosure, saying, “In the box on the next page is a snippet from the concluding comments from WHO regarding Electrical Hypersensitivity Syndrome, which I believe highlight [sic] the issue.”
In that box the following is said about Electrical Hypersensitivity Syndrome (EHS):

CONCLUSIONS
EHS is characterized by a variety of non-specific symptoms that differ from individual to individual. The symptoms are certainly real and can vary widely in their severity. Whatever its cause, EHS can be a disabling problem for the affected individual. EHS has no clear diagnostic criteria and there is no scientific basis to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure. Further, EHS is not a medical diagnosis, nor is it clear that it represents a single medical problem.

This conclusion is self-contradicting, saying indeed there is such a thing as Electrical Hypersensitivity Syndrome which certainly can be disabling… but they don’t know the exact cause.

Gary Duncan, PhD, has written, “This statement excerpted from the WHO website is seriously flawed and outdated. 16 million cases globally indicate this (EHS) is caused and exacerbated dramatically and overwhelmingly proven from EMF exposure and most specifically to Radio Frequency radiation. In case studies of over 800 EHS sufferers regionally this is undeniably and universally the case. Electro-sensitization is neither a psychological or a medical disorder, any more than infection in a cut is an indication of immune dysfunction. They are identical. They are healthy normal reactions to a technology which  ̶ no matter what LPEA’s coverup linguistic gymnastics of the moment are  ̶ they knew they never should have deployed. The effects on the other 183,000 species prove the premises conclusively  ̶ none of whom are psychosomatic or knew about EMF prior to their disablement and demise.”

LIABILITY
My questions #17-24 were about LPEA’s liability for injury and ailments resulting from Electrical Hypersensitivity Syndrome and /or ailments occurring from exposure to the EMF radiation emitted from the meters installed on customer’s homes. Mr. Meier wrote, “Respectfully, we see no factual basis in the concepts of various staff and board members being personally liable and not ‘protected’ by the corporation, implied within the question. We have repeatedly verified this with both our insurance providers and legal staff.”

My response to LPEA is that insurance providers and legal staffs have been known to say whatever the person(s) paying them wants to hear. LPEA’s incorporation does not license LPEA, its Board of Directors or its staff to commit crimes — which is what harming a person or destroying their rights amounts to. This is being demonstrated in the California case with PG&E and California PUC where officials have known since 2011 — the same year LPEA incorporated — the proven physical harm these RF meters do. Officials then colluded to cover this up, and went ahead and installed the meters anyway. PG&E too is incorporated, and they are now under criminal investigation.

Assertions of no legal liability or wrongdoing are the common denominator of any criminal, with few exceptions. Evidence of their (LPEA) prior knowledge regarding the pain and disablements caused to the sensitized communities and their effects on general health and environmental impacts are in place and are identical to the now unraveling cover-up and resignations and federal investigations in California. Lloyds of London long ago denied any underwriting of insurance to issues or damages originating in EMF causes. That means LPEA is uninsured.

— Gary Duncan, PhD

LPEA cannot hide behind the claim that they didn’t know the science that exists behind our claims. They knew, or should have known by due diligence, the true impact of these meters upon our bodies and our rights. It was LPEA’s job to uncover all research on these matters before they planned the installation of these meters. It was LPEA’s job to fully inform members of the co-op of all of the possible and known problems inherent to this technology. It was LPEA’s job to give both sides of the issue and let the customers decide, especially when these meters infringe on our personal choices, our rights, our personal health, and the rights and health of our families.

It is quite obvious to me that LPEA is trying to continue the promotion of AMI meters through purported ignorance of the available science, ignorance of ethics, the need to protect personal credentials… thinking they are keeping liability at bay, and a hundred other excuses that all amount to willful blindness.

These ploys we have come to realize are thinly veiled attempts to keep alive LPEA’s policy of installing these meters, and a false front for extracting extorted money from those of us who don’t want these meters anywhere near us.

I ask the LPEA board of directors and staff to think about and apply these concepts:

Integrity.

Honesty.

Serving those whom you are supposed to serve.

Non-infringement upon anyone’s person or property.

Granting personal choice without extortion.

Honor and respect of the peoples’ right to control their own health to and defend their rights.

Advertisements

Judge Rules Electric Utility’s Smart Meter Opt Out Fees Violate State Law; PSREC Refuses to Reconnect

IMG_0802PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ACTED ILLEGALLY WHEN IT CUT OFF ELECTRICITY TO HART FAMILY

QUINCY, CA — A utility cooperative in rural Northern California has been ordered by Plumas County Superior Court Judge Janet Hilde to:

 “…cancel the opt out fee and monthly fee for reading the analog meter, allowing Plaintiff (StopSmartMeters.org Director Josh Hart) to self-read the analog meter.”

The decision last week comes 14 months after Plumas Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative (PSREC) cut the electric wires to the Hart household in February 2014 though the family have paid for their full electric usage minus the illegal “opt out” fees.  During that time, they have been living without electricity in an all-electric home in the Sierra Nevada mountains, without either a fridge or hot running water, depending on a wood stove for heat, cooking, and heating water. The family is continuing to hold out and have refused to sign PSREC’s proposed agreement that would have traded Mr. Hart’s silence about the dispute over the utility’s hazardous smart meters for restoration of electricity service.  “We refuse to be extorted, coerced, or silenced,” says Plaintiff and veteran anti-smart meter organizer Josh Hart.  “It’s about time PSREC is held to account for its flagrant violations of disability rights.  The court’s decision has vindicated our standing up to the utility and confirmed that PSREC is indeed violating the law. They must obey the law and reconnect services.”

Bob Marshall

In the small claims court case brought by Mr. Hart in March, Judge Hilde found that PSREC and its General Manager Bob Marshall violated state discrimination law.  The fees: $141 to start and $15/ month to use an analog meter, were found to be illegal under CA law as the utility levied a fee for what they knew was a simple accommodation of a physician-confirmed functional impairment, or disability — the removal of RF emitting equipment from the premises.

Judge Hilde’s decision states:

“Plaintiff presented the court with a letter from his physician, stating that he has a condition, Electromagnetic Field Hypersensitivity, which causes him to suffer from headaches and other medical symptoms when exposed to radio frequency from smart meters. Plaintiff also provided the court with copy of the California Public Utility Code section 453(b) which provides in part: ‘No public utility shall prejudice, disadvantage, or require different rates or deposit amounts from a person because of ancestry, medical condition, marital status, or change in marital status, occupation, or any characteristic listed or defined in section 11135 of the Government Code’”

Read full article at:  http://stopsmartmeters.org/2015/04/16/judge-rules-electric-utilitys-smart-meter-opt-out-fees-violate-state-law-psrec-refuses-to-reconnect/

Ralph Nader on Bernie Sanders, the TPP “Corporate Coup d’Etat” & Writing to the White House

Another step toward the New World Order …….sandaura

Obama, Corporate “Free Traitors” and You!

EXCERPTS
The pro-big business President Barack Obama and his corporate allies are starting their campaign to manipulate and pressure Congress to ram through the “pull-down-on-America” Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a trade and foreign investment treaty between twelve nations (Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam).

The first skirmish is a fast track bill to have Congress formally strip itself of its constitutional authority to regulate trade and surrender this historic responsibility to the White House and its corporate lobbies.

Lest you think the TPP is too commercially complex to bother about, think again. This mega-treaty is the latest corporate coup-d’état that sacrifices the American consumer, labor and environmental standards – inventively called “non-tariff trade barriers” – and much U.S. sovereignty to the supremacy of corporate commercial trade.

No single column can adequately describe this colossal betrayal – camouflaged by phrases like “free trade” and “win-win agreements.” For comprehensive analysis of the TPP you can go to Global Trade Watch (http://www.citizen.org/trade/).

This is why Senator Elizabeth Warren is opposing the TPP. She wrote in the Washington Post that the TPP, “would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws — and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers — without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court.”

For example, if a company doesn’t like our controls over cancer-causing chemicals, it could skip the U.S. courts and sue the U.S. before a secret tribunal that can hand down decisions, which can’t be challenged in U.S. courts. If it won before this secret kangaroo court, it could be given millions or hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, charged to you, the taxpayer. Again, the big business “free traitors” are shredding our sovereignty under the Constitution.

READ FULL ARTICLE AT:

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/5/1/ralph_nader_on_bernie_sanders_the

SMART METER INFORMATIONAL VIDEO

01:13 – Harm and violations caused by “smart” meters

07:49 – Unconstitutional takings of property

08:25 – Illegal according to U.S. Code (specific laws cited)

11:25 – Unjustified and inexplicable billing increases

12:30 – Radiofrequencies cause harm to health

13:40 – A solution that works

13:56  – Remove consent 1

4:20  – (An opt-out is not a solution)

15:24 – Accepting public officals’ Oaths of office makes them personally liable

16:35 – Document template with $300M liability

17:40 – Utility reverses position and removes “smart” water meter 1

8:47 – TBYP groups using a liability process (we’ll have clarification and news on this soon)

19:20 – You can make liable violators of the U.S. Constitution 2

1:09 – This process is broad and can extend to more than just your home

22:19 – What happens if we do nothing

22:40 – Q & A