In a Monday letter to the editor, John Powell suggested the Hawaii County Department of Water Supply “cut costs by using new technology” aka, introduce water smart meters in addition to/partnering with HECO’s “advanced (smart) meters.”
This opinion fails to address several key issues that are timely to consider:
• Smart meters are a fire hazard, and such devices have been responsible for thousands of fires, explosions, and other serious safety problems. Smart meters have caused documented health problems. The WHO categorizes RF radiation as a Class 2B carcinogen. There is evidence the smart meters unpredictable blasts of RF make them more toxic than cell phones or Wi-Fi, which are toxic themselves but emit more steady signals. It’s the difference between white noise versus erratic loud blasts. The FCC is a captured agency, primarily interested in cheerleading for the wireless industry, not human health. There are zero biomedical professionals in the FCC, they are engineers.
• Smart meters typically overcharge and inaccurately represent usage, when compared with reliable, accurate analog meters. “Smart meters” and the “smart grid” risk national security and reliability of the electricity supply by opening a new portal to hackers and others who wish to disrupt these services. This is a major cyber-security problem. Smart meters are surveillance devices and violate our Fourth Amendment right to privacy in our homes.
Most grid-tied solar homes have a smart meter, and also have the option of a safer, wired connection. HECO is currently petitioning the PUC to roll out smart meters on the Big Island on an “opt-out,” rather than “opt-in” basis, which may cost ratepayers greatly. You can submit comments to the PUC via email at email@example.com. Stay updated on the status of smart meters in Hawaii at http://www.keepyourpower.org.
There’s a story that you sometimes hear that goes like this: wireless radiation can’t cause health problems because it’s not ionising radiation, which is known to damage DNA and cause cancer. How lovely it would be if that were true! But it’s not—and this is why. Firstly, let’s take a closer look at what ionising radiation actually is. Physicist Vic Leach explains that ‘ionising radiation—such as X-rays and Gammaλ rays—has wavelengths that are a billion times smaller than those used for wireless communication. And they’re the same size as atoms, which means that they interact with atoms, dislodging electrons in their orbit and creating ionised molecules in air and tissue. Hence the label “ionising” radiation.’
On the other hand, non-ionising radiation—such as ultraviolet (UV) light, mobile phone radiation, WiFi and 5G—doesn’t have enough energy to knock electrons off atoms. However, this does not mean it’s safe. There are other ways that non-ionising radiation can interact with atoms and cause damage such as cancer. Take UV light, for example. We know that it causes skin cancer. There’s a large body of scientific evidence that wireless radiation, even though it’s non-ionising, can, in fact, cause both DNA damage and, most likely, cause cancer. In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radiofrequency radiation as a Class 2B (possible) carcinogen and since that time much more evidence linking it to cancer has been found, including data from animal experiments such as the $30 million dollar US National Toxicology Program and the Ramazzini Institute Italian study.
An Italian court proclaimed that a plaintiff’s brain tumour, a rare nerve tumour similar to those seen in animal studies, was caused by his mobile phone use.A recent review by Y Choi found that 17 minutes of mobile phone use a day over a ten-year period increased a person’s risk of developing tumours by 60%. A recent review by Professor Henry Lai, found wireless radiation damaged genes. Wireless radiation causes “oxidative stress” which indirectly creates DNA damage, a precursor to cancer.You’ll be able to see more evidence that wireless radiation is harmful in our regular newsletter ‘EMR and Health’ (see link below).So next time you hear someone tell you that wireless radiation is safe because it’s not ionising radiation, you will know they are not familiar with the science on this issue.For more information see article by Professor Denis Henshaw:
What else you can doIf you found the information above of interest, please forward this email to others.If you’d like more information, you can download our May issue of EMR and Health here.If you’ve been sent this message by a friend and would like to subscribe to future updates, you can do that here.
Nineteen Hertz and Below: An Infrasonic History of the Twentieth Century Author(s): Sophia Roosth Source: Resilience: A Journal of the Environmental Humanities , Vol. 5, No. 3, Common Senses and Critical Sensibilities (Fall 2018), pp. 109-124 Published by: University of Nebraska Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5250/resilience.5.3.0109 REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5250/resilience.5.3.0109?seq=1&cid=pdfreference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms University of Nebraska Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Resilience: A Journal of the Environmental Humanities This content downloaded from 126.96.36.199 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt Nineteen Hertz and Below An Infrasonic History of the Twentieth Century Sophia Roosth Th is is a history of a sound you cannot hear. Human hearing ranges, on average, between twenty and twenty thousand hertz, and infrasound vibrates at a frequency lower than twenty hertz, ever so slightly below the envelope of human audition.1 Infrasound fi rst rattled the scientifi c world in 1883, when the explosion of Krakatoa between the Indonesian islands of Java and Sumatra registered on barographs as subsonic vibrations powerful enough to circle the globe seven times.2 Infrasound shuddered back into scientifi c attention immediately aft er World War II, when interest in infrasound oscillated between harnessing infrasonic vibrations as weapons and tuning into them as signatures or acoustic footprints of nuclear testing, unheard vibrations from a stealthy enemy. Because infrasonic vibrations are not easily dissipated by physical obstacles, they travel much farther than audible sound, a quality that makes them a useful means for measuring events occurring far away, from earthquakes and volcanoes to rocket launches. In 2011 the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization presided over a controlled explosion in Israel’s Negev desert to fi ne- tune their infrasonicmonitoring equipment; they found that the explosion was recorded by monitoring stations as far away as Mongolia.3 In February 2013, infrasound sensors recorded the strongest infrasonic wave on record— a dense fi reball blooming from the Chelyabinsk meteor as it exploded high above Russia’s Ural Mountains. A report in Science described the “meteor’s death throes” as emitting a piercing yet “silent scream,” one that, while inaudible, nonetheless propagated powerful vibrations across great distances.4 This content downloaded from 188.8.131.52 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt 110 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3 As a liminal category alternately dubbed “unsound” or “sound- like,”5 infrasound affords scholars the opportunity to interrogate sensorial ambiguity. Sound studies scholar Jonathan Sterne differentiates between sound and other vibrations: “As part of a larger physical phenomenon of vibration, sound is a product of the human senses and not a thing in the world apart from humans.”6 Such a definition authorizes sound studies to turn a deaf ear to those vibrations that are inaudible to humans yet are nonetheless key sensory capacities for nonhuman animals: ultrasonic vibrations among dolphins, bats, and dogs, for example, or infrasonic vibrations with which whales and elephants can communicate and anticipate danger in their immediate environments, such as earthquakes and tsunamis.7 How, then, might sound studies admit into its purview (its percussion?) those aspects of the vibratory world that are not, strictly speaking, sonic? To productively draw sensory studies into conversation with multispecies science studies requires that the non human umwelt be examined as rigorously and on the same footing as the human sensorium (and, indeed, to query the very notion of a singular and homogenous “human sensorium” in the first place).8 A more capacious understanding of sound could consequently reorient its focus away from not only anthropocentric but also “earcentric” models of sonic perception in favor of an extra cochlear modality that recognizes entire percussing bodies as vibratory sensory apparatuses.9 Once we retune hearing to incorporate the entire body, rather than ears alone, then the sensory hierarchy falls away. Sensory studies scholars consequently must admit the possibility that sound— or any other sense— cannot be studied (or experienced) in isolation but only on a spectrum with other sensory and affective states. Infrasound is on the fringe of the audible yet bleeds into the palpable. It occupies the threshold between hearing and the many other perceptual modalities that audition both complements and overlaps (most significantly, tactility and proprioception, but also nausea and dizziness, as well as affective, cognitive, and emotional states). The twentieth- century history of infrasound is one place to begin such a project, as it problematizes which vibrations do or do not count as “sound”; requires an extra cochlear model of hearing; and attaches audition to somatic feelings and moods, including agitation, anxiety, irritability, and apprehensiveness. In her history of vibration, Shelley Trower demonstrates how This content downloaded from 184.108.40.206 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 111 nineteenth- century physiologists, poets, and spiritualists used sound “to make audible the silent vibrations that were shaping the experience of modernity.”10 Gillian Beer similarly notes late- nineteenth- century anxieties that attended the limits of perception: “Not only the distortion but the extreme tenuity of our senses was brought home as the subsonic, ultrasonic, and subsensible . . . began to surround and imbue the human.”11 Dovetailing with these histories, I fi nd that infrasound became an increasingly salient cultural concern precisely during the midcentury moment when nuclear weapons testing, Cold War logics, and ecological consciousness inaugurated planetary thinking anew. A vibration that could circle the earth and indicate precarious or degraded environments crystallized widespread scientific and popular concerns about the hazards of modern geopolitical globality, which resonate to this day. Auditing infrasound as it echoes from the mid- twentieth century to now allows sensory scholars to inquire into the epistemic status of that which is palpable yet unheard. How do our understandings of sound change when they are not vibrations acting on bodies but vibrations that resonate with and within our fleshy, pulpy selves? In this essay, I relate how infrasonic vibrations were cast as sonic weapons, as well as a signature of the use of atomic weapons— specifically, in order to monitor international compliance with the Limited and Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaties. I examine infrasound as both cause and register of human anxiety in a technological world stuff used with vibrations both heard and unheard. Finally, I stray into infrasound’s use as a way of debunking ghostly hauntings in order to tune in to infrasound as diagnostic of modern paranoias about the imperceptible risks to which we imagine ourselves exposed. At stake is the relation of sounds to vibrations, of vibrations to bodies, and of bodies to the vibrating and perilous environments in which they are nestled. A Devastating Whistle: Silent Weapons in a Cold War In 1941, infrasound reverberated through the pages of Robert Heinlein’s speculative fiction novel The Day after Tomorrow. Originally serially published in Astounding Science Fiction as Sixth Column the same year as the attack on Pearl Harbor, Heinlein’s book features American scientists who develop an infrasonic weapon designed to kill a Pan- Asian This content downloaded from 220.127.116.11 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt 112 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3 enemy alliance. Vibrations pitched at fourteen hertz struck fear in the hearts of America’s enemies. Paging through Heinlein’s xenophobic fantasy of vibrant infrasonic retribution, one reads, “Those damned subsonics give me the creeping horrors even when I know what’s going on. . . . There’s nothing like the fear of something you can’t understand to break a man down.”12 Stories about weaponizing infrasound were not, however, limited to science fiction novels— they also seeped into peer- reviewed scientific publications, popular science magazines, and mainstream and yellow journalism. Foremost among these was the strange tale of Russian- born French scientist Vladimir Gavreau.13 Twenty years aft er the publication of The Day after Tomorrow, Gavreau, head of the Electroacoustics and Automation Laboratory of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), and his fellow researchers began to feel nauseated, dizzy, and unfocused. While investigating vibrations visible in the liquids found in his laboratory, Gavreau discovered that a defective industrial ventilator in a nearby building had caused a standing wave to vibrate below twenty hertz in his laboratory, though not in any adjacent laboratories. Upon disabling the fan, he and his colleagues immediately recovered. Intrigued by the connection between low- frequency vibrations and feelings of illness and unease, and in particular by the conundrum of “directive vibrations,” Gavreau began researching whether infrasonic vibrations, while unheard, might nonetheless be physically palpable. What happens next, however, oscillates between fact and fiction, making it difficult to separate history from conspiracy theory. Some writers doubt to this day whether Gavreau existed, despite the fact that journal articles and patents bear his name.14 A 1967 issue of the UNESCO Courier speculated that Gavreau was researching a lethal “black noise,” building a “devastating whistle” and a “mammoth organ pipe” twenty- four meters long that could disable or even kill enemy combatants by surrounding them in a sonic “envelope of death” or turning their internal organs into “jelly.”15 Researchers in his laboratory, the press reported, would be snatched from near death after their internal organs “hit critical resonance frequencies.”16 One champion of Gavreau was cut- up writer William S. Burroughs, who carried a clipping of a Sunday Times article about Gavreau in his wallet and showed it to several musicians he interviewed in the early 1970s. Burroughs explained to Led Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page, This content downloaded from 18.104.22.168 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 113 Professor Gavreau of France developed infra- sound as a military weapon. A powerful infra- sound installation can, he claims, kill everyone in a fi ve- mile radius, knock down walls and break windows. Infra- sound kills by setting up vibrations within the body so that, as Gavreau puts it, “You can feel all the organs in your body rubbing together.” The plans for this device can be obtained from the French Patent Office, and infra- sound generators constructed from inexpensive materials.17 Burroughs similarly sketched out Gavreau’s story to David Bowie while interviewing him for Rolling Stone in November 1973; the two imagined making music that might “maim [the audience].”18 Weaponized infrasound left an indelible impression on Bowie, who told Dick Cavett in a televised interview a year later that a “black noise bomb” that could destroy a city had been invented in France and that you could purchase the patent for less than four dollars.19 Industrial musicians. The robbing Gristle, also devotees of Burroughs, incorporated infrasound into their live performances, as The robbing Gristle synthesist Chris Carter explained, to “make people do things that they didn’t want to do— making people feel ill and dizzy and stuff .”20 The band also bombarded squatters with infrasonic waves to force them out of Genesis P- Orridge’s backyard.21 Gavreau’s “mammoth organ pipe” featured in a 1973 volume of Belgian feminist comic book Yoko Tsuno, in which the titular electrical engineer must rescue a famous organist from the villainous Karl Moebius and his destructive infrasonic L’orgue Du Diable (devil’s organ). Such anecdotes are, perhaps, symptomatic of Cold War paranoia heavily dosed with the coke- fueled avant- garde industrial and glam scenes of the early 1970s. Nonetheless, they persist in sober sources to this day; the Hastings Center issued a 2010 report warning its readers, “Acoustical weapons, which have not yet been perfected, would employ inaudible infrasound to resonate in body cavities and cause disorientation, nausea, vomiting, and bowel spasms.”22 Such hypothetical weapons are, in many ways, an insidious obverse to the use of sonic booms by the American military during the Cold War— in the 1964 Oklahoma Sonic Boom Experiment, citizens were regularly exposed to sonic booms (eight times a day over six months) to test the psychological repercussions of the “sound of freedom.” In such This content downloaded from 22.214.171.124 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt 114 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3 exercises, “through sound, the state touched people’s bodies,” such that “the Cold War was mapped onto the field of sensory experience.”23 In Sonic Warfare, Steve Goodman notes how a “tactics of frequency” “brings into the field of power the dimension of unsound.”24 While the use of audible sound— loud, piercing noises and grating pop music— has been studied as part of the history of sonic warfare, from crowd control to human torture, panic over (or enthusiasm for) infrasonic weaponry draws our attention toward the specter of sounds unheard, transmitted from far away yet acting intimately on the bodily interior. “The Voice of the Atmosphere” Given that infrasound was already understood to be a weapon in itself, it is unsurprising that infrasound would soon also be enrolled as indexical of weaponry and hence a deterrent against the proliferation and testing of nuclear weapons. By the 1950s both the United States and the Soviet Union had set up infrasound monitoring stations in order to detect atmospheric nuclear testing.25 Over two thousand nuclear weapons tests were conducted between 1945 and 1996; and in the first two decades following World War II, infrasound was an efficient mechanism for the US government to keep tabs on Soviet atmospheric weapons detonations.26 “Studying VLF [very- low frequency] emissions produced by nuclear explosions,” Douglas Kahn notes, “was part of a larger scientific task of producing and monitoring seemingly every possible electromagnetic and acoustical (seismic, infrasound) signal and chemical and isotopic signature from around the world.”27 The 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty moved nuclear testing underground, where its monitoring became the province of seismic rather than infrasonic recording devices. Infrasound monitoring of nuclear weapons was revived again in the 1990s, when the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was drafted and codified by the United Nations General Assembly.28 In the intervening years, a global network of infrasound stations were installed to monitor compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the organization of which is headquartered in Vienna.29 Sixty global infrasound stations are currently being built, and forty- five, at last count, are already functioning, registering infrasonic waves, and transmitting signals back to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) headquarters in Vienna.30 This content downloaded from 126.96.36.199 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 115 When North Korea detonated nuclear weapons in 2010, scientists at the CTBTO offices knew hours later, before North Korea had made an official announcement.31 In this respect, infrasound monitoring is not simply a technology deployed in the service of desired geopolitical harmony but rather functions as harmonic geopolitics. While nuclear weapons detonations were rare occasions for most citizens, other sources of infrasound were growing increasingly commonplace. The same 1967 issue of the UNESCO Courier that publicized Gavreau’s research also reported on the dangers of modern noise to human welfare. “The Danger of Sounds We Cannot Hear” blames infrasound for a host of conditions, from the discomfort experienced by airline passengers to dizziness, fatigue, and a “fl uttering sensation” plaguing urban dwellers. Readers are warned that “inaudible noise, like an invisible enemy, is even more deadly than the noise we hear.”32 No longer thought of only as a literal weapon but also as an inaudible yet deadly by- product of modernity, infrasound had bifurcated. Fig. 1. Infrasound monitoring station, Schauinsland, Germany. Image courtesy of the CTBTO Public Information, https:// www .ctbto .org. This content downloaded from 188.8.131.52 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt 116 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3 In May 1976, scientists at the Lamont- Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University’s atmospheric infrasound station, began registering what researcher William Donn reported as “strange signals [that] began to appear . . . at about the same time on alternate days.”33 After several weeks, the researchers realized that they were recording the first Concorde flights landing at Dulles International Airport. They used the resulting infrasonic vibrations, which were degradations of the Concorde’s “sonic boom,” as an atmospheric probe to listen to what Donn called “the voice of the atmosphere.” Following the Concorde’s rumblings, Donn noted small atmospheric differences that registered on morning and afternoon flights, in summer and in autumn; and in so doing, he realized that environmental change could be monitored by listening to infrasonic frequencies.34 Around the same time, physicians began attending to infrasound’s possible effects on the body. No longer concerned with infrasound as a weapon, it was now recognized as a resonant, inaudible, yet potentially hazardous and inescapable artifact of urban modernity— a subauditory miasma. A literature review published in Lancet in 1973 noted that different parts of the body resonated at various frequencies— “for example, the abdomen at about 10 Hz. . . . Abdomen vibrations may cause distress and sickness, whilst excessive chest vibration may interfere with the normal respiratory system.”35 The authors were careful to note, however, that while infrasound may be detrimental to one’s health, one person’s nuisance was another’s pleasure; “Chest vibrations,” they wrote, “incidentally are a welcome effect at discotheques and pop concerts, where the music is felt as well as heard— the total experience.”36 Th e attention to our bodies as entities already vibrating in tune with the infrasonic environment triggered concerns that the wrong kind of infrasound might be deleterious, even fatal. The medicalization of infrasound built on earlier anxieties that infrasound might be weaponized, joining them to worries over the ways in which a vibratory ecosystem might impact, penetrate, and resonate with human bodies. In 1980, physician Nuno Castelo Branco was appointed the chief medical officer at an aircraft manufacturing and repair facility owned and operated by the Portuguese Air Force. He began noting strange symptoms and behavior among his employees, which he chalked up to their long- term exposure to infrasonic vibrations.37 He reported that several employees, in apparent fugue states or epileptic fi ts, would want This content downloaded from 184.108.40.206 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 117 der dangerously close to spinning propellers, from which fellow colleagues would drag them away at the last minute. He named this condition “vibroacoustic disease.” Castelo Branco compared diseases caused by acoustic vibrations to other conditions that result from invisible or impalpable environmental phenomena; “It is high time that scientists begin to view acoustical phenomena with a framework usually applied to electromagnetic phenomena,” he pronounced.38 Within the electromagnetic spectrum, for example, the eye registers light within a small range of frequencies. Electromagnetic waves beyond that frequency— most notably, x- rays— are unseen yet nonetheless profoundly hazardous to one’s health. He proposed a similar model for vibratory phenomena; while not perceived by the human ear as sound, the acoustical spectrum nonetheless includes frequencies that can do serious bodily damage or be harnessed for medical diagnostics and therapies, as is the case with ultrasound. Castelo Branco’s work has in the last five years been bolstered by physicians studying a contested illness that was named wind turbine syndrome in 2009. Nina Pierpont, the pediatrician who coined the term, noted that infrasonic waves emanating from wind turbines cause “a sensation of internal quivering, vibration, or pulsation accompanied by agitation, anxiety, alarm, irritability, rapid heartbeat, nausea, and sleep disturbance.”39 Recall Robert Heinlein’s science- fictional scientists railing against “those damned subsonics” giving them “the creeping horrors.”40 Though not recognized as a legitimate medical illness, people who live or work near industrial wind turbines report a wide variety of symptoms ranging from vertigo to nausea, irritability, annoyance, stress, and panic attacks.41 Anxiety is here treated as a suite of symptoms triggered by resonance frequencies, similar in many respects to Vladimir Gavreau’s report half a century earlier. If anxiety and paranoia was once a side effect of what infrasound vibrations might be indexical of, now infrasound itself is identified as the immediate cause of embodied anxiety. If infrasound was once considered a rarity, triggered by a rogue nuclear blast or a defective generator, for those who today identify as suffering from vibroacoustic disease or wind turbine syndrome, it is an unavoidable blight, a vibration blanketing the modern technologically mediated globe. In the last ten years, infrasound monitoring facilities are increasingly being repurposed toward monitoring and predicting environment. This content downloaded from 220.127.116.11 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC All use subject to htt 118 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3
In the last ten years, infrasound monitoring facilities are increasingly being repurposed toward monitoring and predicting environmental risks— earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, meteors hurtling toward earth from outer space— in addition to anthropogenic phenomena such as nuclear explosions and rocket launches. Though built to eavesdrop on clandestine nuclear tests, infrasound is now a burgeoning and globalized data- collection project aiming to hearken the vibratory world, a “soundtrack to catastrophe.”42 A Science article reported on the rumbling of Mt. Etna in the summer of 2001: “The shaking mountain, with its roiling ash cloud, acted like a giant transmitter, triggering pressure waves that undulated through the atmosphere.”43 Volcanoes register signature infrasonic vibrations in advance of exploding, giving CTBT stations a few minutes’ to hours’ lead time in warning communities living nearby. In 2013 the CTBTO signed an agreement with the director of the Geophysical Survey of the Russian Academy of Sciences allowing Russians to receive data from infrasound stations in order to deliver near- real- time global tsunami warnings.44 Russia, the country for which infrasound monitoring stations were built in the United States in the first place, is now a steward of infrasonic vibrations. The retooling of CTBT stations to monitor and predict volcanoes and earthquakes filters infrasound’s previous technological uses, refashioning the enemy not as a political threat but an environmental one. In this regard, infrasound might be considered, following sound installation artist Raviv Ganchrow, to be “the bandwidth of the Anthropocene,” because “environmental infrasound exhibits an intermingling of large- scale human industrialized activity with these other earth- and atmosphere- related frequencies.”45 Such techno-ecological vibrations are, to quote Douglas Kahn, “emissaries of earth magnitude” that allow globalized auditing of an imagined “whole earth” absent the technological surveillance afforded by “the ‘earthrise’ and ‘blue marble’ photographs of the 1960s and 1970s” or contemporary GPS satellites.46 Conclusion: A Shiver in the Air In the early 1980s a British engineer named Vic Tandy started doing design work for a company that manufactured medical equipment. Working in the company’s laboratory one evening, he began to feel unwell: “There was a feeling of depression, occasionally a cold shiver.”47 Sitting at his desk writing, he “began to feel increasingly uncomfortable”— “sweating but cold,” he reported, “and the feeling of depression was not. This content downloaded from 18.104.22.168 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
“sweating but cold,” he reported, “and the feeling of depression was noticeable. . . . It was as though something was in the room with” him. He had the uncanny sense of being watched. He saw a ghostly apparition appear on his left , moving, he later wrote, as one “would expect a person to.” He felt a chill in the room, and his hair stood on end. When he turned his head, the apparition vanished. The following morning, Tandy, an amateur fencer, was sharpening his fencing blade in the laboratory, when he noticed that it quivered at a regular frequency. Using acoustic equipment, he investigated the lab and found that there was a standing infrasonic wave in the laboratory vibrating close to nineteen hertz, which was caused by a new fan recently installed in the extraction system. Once the fan was replaced, the hauntings ceased. Tandy speculated that the infrasonic vibration was responsible for the feelings of unease and dread sometimes associated with ghostly hauntings. He even suggested that the spectral figure was caused by the viscous fluid in his eyeball vibrating at the same frequency as the standing wave, thereby distorting his vision and causing visual hallucinations. He made a modest career over the next few years as an amateur ghost hunter, traveling to other haunted sites— medieval cellars, moldering castles— in the United Kingdom in search of infrasonic waves.48 Infrasound cannot be contained by canonical definitions of “sound,” nor has it ever been properly contained by scientific orthodoxy. From the alarmed report of a Soviet scientist’s “devastating whistle” that could liquefy internal organs to science- fictional death rays to contested illnesses marked by feelings of quivering and vibratory dread, infrasound has, since its discovery, been associated with hidden, oft en sinister or malevolent forces, those which are all the more unsettling because exposure is unnoticed, even insensible. A liminal vibration propagating at the cusp of human audibility, ever so slightly below the threshold of human perception, invites all- too- human anxieties about the limits of our own capacity to sense and know the environment in which we are embedded. The infrasonic calls attention to our embodiment, our status as sacs and pockets of quivering fluid and pulp that are submerged in and resonate with an uncertain environment— hence long- standing worries over vibrating vitreous humors, organs jellifying, and head- exploding sonic waves. Infrasound also pulsates with human panics over hidden forces and the limits of our ability to perceive them— phenomena not…
HAPS: Human and Pollinator Sanctuary Resolution a Hill town Health Initiative To see if the town will vote to declare itself a human and pollinator sanctuary (HAPS) free of microwave radiation from low-altitude satellites and additional wireless infrastructure until a panel of independent MD’s and scientists familiar with long term patterns of disease in populations completes a risk and environmental assessment for these additional layers of microwave radiation exposure.
Whereas the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), a “captured agency”1 has approved more than 13,000 low altitude 5G satellites and appears ready to approve many more.
Whereas corporations like SpaceX and OneWeb have already launched more than 1,400 such satellites and along with Telesat, AST and Science, Lynk, Amazon, Omni-space and Facebook are planning to launch approximately 100,000 in total.
Whereas the majority of independent studies on this type of radiation indicate significant biological harm to humans, pollinators and other flora and fauna.2
Whereas the increased number of rocket launches required for this deployment will likely increase air pollution, deplete the ozone layer and accelerate global warming according to researchers.3
Whereas we have not consented to be part of any biological experiment conducted by any corporation or government entity.
Whereas our taxpayer dollars are currently being given to Big Wireless by the FCC to build cell towers in rural areas which require pollinators to continue farming and which are already served by broadband internet, often at additional taxpayer expense.
Whereas rural areas are the last and final refuge for millions of people around the world suffering from electrical sensitivity, aka electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) aka microwave sickness, a debilitating condition recognized under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Whereas fiber to the home is a secure, safe, energy-efficient and future-proof way of insuring everyone has access to the digital economy.
Dear Senator Moore, Senator DiZoglio and Representative Linsky,
The members of Massachusetts for Safe Technology wish to extend our gratitude for the letters you sent to the DPU for Docket 20-69. The Order on the Grid Modernization Plan, attached, was issued this month. It references your input (p. 21) and requires the utility companies to submit a plan that includes a ratepayer opt-out (p. 35-36). Unfortunately, it also includes an opt-out tariff which is likely illegal under ADA to discriminate against those with the ADA recognized disability of electromagnetic sensitivity. There is a lawsuit in Maine on this right now and the court is allowing it to proceed.
Smart meter owners have fewer tariff options from which to choose and typically pay more to switch energy deals, new research by comparethemarket.com has found.
The price comparison website analysed 223 tariffs and found only 37 (17%) were available to households with a smart meter already installed, leaving them with fewer choices when it comes to switching energy supplier.
In comparison, people who have not yet switched to a smart meter had 186 tariffs to choose from.
When it comes to price, smart meter households were also losing out, the analysis found.
The average annual switchable dual fuel tariff price for those with smart meters was £1,089, compared with households without smart meters being offered tariffs for £1,071 per year – a difference of £18.
Peter Earl, head of energy at comparethemarket.com said: “The industry should be encouraging people who haven’t yet to switch to smart meters, but this does not seem to be the case with tariff variety and pricing.
“There needs to be more incentives to encourage people to switch, including competitive pricing,”
According to the price comparison site, the latest government figures show in 2020, a total of 3.1 million smart meters were installed in domestic properties.
The smart meter programme’s aim is to replace traditional gas and electricity meters with smart meters to help make the energy system cheaper, cleaner and more reliable.
However, the rollout of smart meters was hindered by the installation of meters that did not retain their smart functionality when people switch supplier.
At the end of 2020, there were 22.2 million smart meters in domestic properties in Great Britain, 42% of all domestic meters.
However, only 17.6 million were smart meters operating in smart mode, leaving millions of households without a fully operational meter.
Peter added: “The original target to ensure all UK homes had been offered smart meters by the end of 2020 was clearly unrealistic, since only two-fifths of households have them installed.
“The rollout has been extended so there are fewer excuses for missing the next deadline, even if timings are tight.
“Smart meters are a useful tool to help people manage their energy consumption, but millions of homes are stuck with smart meters that operate in the same way that a traditional meter does, which doesn’t allow them to receive the full benefits promised.
“We need to see dedicated action to ensure these meters are soon enrolled into the smart systems and so that customer get the smart benefits and do not lose them when switching supplier.”
For immediate distribution PG&E REFUNDS SMART METER “OPT-OUT” FEES TO EMF-DISABLED CUSTOMER On April 16, Pacific Gas and Electric refunded Smart Meter “opt-out” fees paid by the family of Nina Beety who is disabled by electromagnetic sensitivity. Beety requested disabled accommodation from PG&E to have analog electromechanical meters on her family’s home when the company initiated its wireless Smart Meter roll-out in her community. She explained that EMF-emitting devices cause her disabling health effects. PG&E ignored Beety’s requests for disabled accommodation, and refused to allow residential customers to have analog, non-digital meters without paying a so-called “opt-out” fee. The family was forced to pay $415. in fees to avoid Smart Meters on their home.
The Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits surcharge fees for disabled people. When PG&E filed for bankruptcy in 2019, Beety’s family then filed a proof of claim with the Bankruptcy Court for the “opt-out” fees they paid, stating the claim basis as “Smart Meter opt-out fees that were unlawful surcharges against a disabled person (ADA Title II Technical Assistance Manual, II-1.3000 Relationship to title III)” PG&E objected to this claim, and on February 25, 2021, asked the court to expunge it. “The simpler Customer Bar Date Notice made clear that Customers were not required to file Proofs of Claim for ordinary and customary refunds, overpayments, billing credits, deposits, or similar billing items. The Customer No Liability / Passthrough Claims listed on Exhibit 1 arise from either (1) Customer Security Deposits or (2) Claims that arise from Customer Billing Disputes…Accordingly, for the reasons set forth herein, the Customer No Liability / Passthrough Claims should be expunged because, in accordance with the Bar Date Order, they will be resolved in the ordinary course.” On March 24, 2021, Beety submitted this timely Response to the Bankruptcy Court: Our claim is not an “ordinary and customary” customer billing item.
We have a special type of billing claim dispute that rises on the fact that I am disabled, and unlawful charges were placed on the household account that interfered with my disabled accommodation. Those unlawful charges were surcharges that are not allowed under the ADA/ADAA and FHAA. This is a meritorious disabled rights claim that was never resolved. It should be resolved by a full and complete refund. Closing my claim would be yet another burden, abrogating my civil rights. Please ensure that my rights are protected. Faced with a federal judge who had read Beety’s response, PG&E withdrew its objection to the family’s claim to the Bankruptcy Court and did not further contest it (recorded in Judge Dennis Montali’s ruling, April 5, 2021). On April 20, Beety’s family received a full refund check from PG&E for the $415. surcharge fee, plus $24.17 interest which they had not requested. It is noteworthy that this refund was not a percentage of claim or pennies on the dollar which bankruptcy claims often receive, but a complete refund with interest. It took facing a bankruptcy judge in court for PG&E to quit fighting and refund fees that were unlawful surcharges under the ADA and that discriminate against disabled people. Beety said, “With this action, PG&E and other utilities must now halt their practice of charging unlawful “opt-out” surcharge fees to customers disabled by electromagnetic sensitivity or who have other EMF-sensitive medical conditions, and the companies must refund all unlawful surcharge fees already paid by these disabled customers.
Utilities must allow the simple, readily achievable, and reasonable disabled accommodation of analog, electromechanical, non-digital utility meters for all disabled persons who require them.”
Breaking News: Oregon State Health Authority Downplayed Wi-Fi Health Risks to School Children and Omitted Scientific Research Showing Harm
Experts worldwide slam the Oregon Health Authority report and call on the governor and legislature for retraction. An investigation may result in hearings in the Oregon State Legislature. The Washington Spectator has published an investigative report by Daniel Forbes entitled “Oregon Health Authority Condemned by Scientists For Scrubbing Report on Wireless Hazards in Schools,” which exposes how the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) issued an error-ridden report to the legislature on children and health effects of wireless radiation in schools. An international group of experts, the Environmental Working Group and Physicians for Safe Technology have sent letters on the scientific basis for a retraction of the OHA report to Oregon Gov. Kate Brown. “No way round it: Oregon’s public health agency, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA), has issued a shoddy, biased report on the potential harm to the state’s roughly 600,000 school kids from the wireless devices proliferating in classrooms” Forbes wrote.
Forbes, a Portland-based reporter, documents how the OHA relied on wireless industry-funded studies, inaccurately presented research findings, and ignored studies showing harmful effects. Forbes analyzed several drafts of the OHA report that he obtained through public information requests. He found an inadequate review process coupled with deletions of scientific findings linking wireless radiation exposure to cancer and other health issues.
In response to the OHA report, senior scientists from the United States and around the world, including Dr. Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program, signed a lettersent to Brown, the State Legislature, and OHA’s leadership calling for immediate retraction of the report due to its flaws, inconsistencies, and lack of science-based conclusions. The numerous inadequacies and lack of science-based conclusions have been documented in a 100-page report by Environmental Health Trust, referenced in the scientists’ letter.
Devra Davis, Ph.D., founder of Environmental Health Trust, released a video commenting on the report. She says it would never have passed peer review or been published by the National Academy of Sciences. “It’s a highly selective, skewed analysis of a limited amount of literature that includes biased studies funded by industry.” Investigative Hearings Cindy Franklin of Consumers for Safe Cell Phones characterized the report as reeking of “pressure by the wireless industry to repeat the lie that wireless radiation is safe, even for children.” She urged Oregonians to call or email their representatives. “OHA leadership has been implicated in this blatant, coordinated public health deception,” Franklin said. “How high up does this go? Governor Brown and the legislature must immediately hold investigative hearings.” The Washington Spectator investigation could lead to hearings in the Oregon State Legislature. Oregon State Sen. Michael Dembrow was quoted by Forbes as saying, “If there are flaws in the report, they need to be remedied. The report is important to get a clear assessment of the science.” “We need to have a hearing to hear both a critique of the report and OHA’s defense. Then the legislature needs to come up with funding to do a more in-depth report,” added Dembrow, chair of the Senate Committee on Education. Dembrow concluded, “It was a mistake on OHA’s part to make it look like a real study. It’s more like a memo.” Unlike a scientific journal article, “There were no reviewers as such.”
Scientific Letter by International Experts, Physicians, and Environmental Health Organizations The letter by scientists to Brownstates, “The report would not pass peer review as it omitted animal and cellular studies and thus it does not provide a comprehensive or systematic review of the relevant literature. … The failure of Oregon Health Authority to utilize in their review the significant body of evidence showing harm to animals from wireless radiation exposure is contrary to public health principles and OHA’s own established protocols of using animal studies in many other reviews. By omitting key peer-reviewed scientific evidence of adverse effects and downplaying the scientific studies showing impacts to memory and the brain, the OHA review does not comport with the agency’s mission of protecting and promoting public health.” Read the letter by U.S., International, and Environmental Health Trust experts. Watch Dr. Devra Davis’s Response to the Oregon Health Authority Wireless ReportPhysicians For Safe Technology Response Physicians For Safe Technology (PST) also sent a letter to the Oregon Health Authority stating the Oregon Health Authority report “endangers the public by asserting that health risks are absent or minimal.” “PST believes that today the scientific evidence strongly suggests risks for cancers, neurological disease, reproductive harm, and neurodevelopmental risks for the fetus and newborn. Sufficient evidence exists in peer-reviewed professional and scientific papers published over more than two decades to reach the conclusion that public health warnings are necessary, and that the public should be both educated and protected by health agencies. … Existing FCC (Federal Communications Commission) guidelines for public exposure are grossly inadequate. The public is not protected by them. The State of Oregon is unwise to rely on the FCC’s outdated and grossly inadequate wireless health safety standards as a measure of protection for children.” Read the letter by Physicians for Safe Technology
Environmental Working Group Response Another major environmental health organization, the Environmental Working Group, also submitted a letter to the Oregon Health Authority stating, “Given the substantial scientific evidence demonstrating that RFR (radiofrequency radiation) exposure can negatively affect the brain and the heart, EWG is calling for the Oregon Health Authority, or OHA, to revise its report … by including the latest findings from human and animal studies that demonstrate the risks of RFR for children’s health and public health generally.” Read the letter by the Environmental Working Group
Opposition to California Bills SB 556 and AB 537- URGENT ACTION NEEDED TO STOP TELECOM POWER GRAB Sometimes when you are up against overwhelming odds against a corrupt system intent on depriving you of your rights of due process and health & safety, you need to get creative to get your message across. That’s what two guys did the other day in the California state senate, in order to draw attention to two bills quickly moving through the state legislature that would destroy local governments’ right to regulate 5G and other wireless infrastructure on the public right-of-way. Particularly alarming is how COVID is being used as a pretext to get these bills through with minimal public involvement. Watch the last 20 minutes of the video posted on our site, to get an idea of what we are facing, and how bold activists are raising the alarm. Now it’s your turn. If you live in California, your urgent action is required to preserve local control over wireless cell siting decisions. Your options are now limited to the following if you want to avoid a 5G cell site going in 6 feet from your kids bedroom: 1. Speak out now against these bills by going to Wire California OR…. 2. Prepare to take direct action and get arrested, with uncertain effect If you don’t fancy being stuffed in the back of a patrol car with handcuffs, or having your health destroyed by Crown Castle or Verizon, I recommend you contact your state Senator and Assembly member right away. Even better is to go to Sacramento and tell them in person. Thank you- we appreciate you making some noise on this one. -Stop Smart Meters!
p.s. if you do not have a good EMF meter, or need to upgrade to one more likely to detect newer 5G frequencies, please visit our online store to pick up a meter at a discount. Shipping is fast and free and all proceeds support our outreach and advocacy. You can also donate to us by visiting this page.
StopSmartMeters.org via ActionNetwork.org email@example.com
Mystery neurological illness cluster New Brunswick, Canada
19 MAY 21Mystery neurological illness cluster New Brunswick, CanadaNew Brunswick Cluster of Neurological Syndrome of Unknown CauseOffice of the Chief Medical Officer of Health, New Brunswick The Province of New Brunswick is collaborating with local and national subject matter experts and health-care providers to investigate a group of individuals who are experiencing signs and symptoms of a neurological syndrome of unknown cause (NSUC).At this time, the investigation is active and ongoing to determine if there are similarities among the reported cases that can identify potential causes for this syndrome, and to help identify possible strategies for prevention. The investigation team is exploring all potential causes including food, environmental and animal exposures.Investigation overviewSince early 2020, physicians in New Brunswick have been identifying a number of individuals with an unusual combination of neurological symptoms. Despite extensive medical investigation, a diagnosis for these individuals has not yet been determined.Local health-care providers in New Brunswick have engaged the Public Health Agency of Canada’s Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Surveillance System (CJDSS) to actively investigate the possibility of human prion disease, but to date, all test results have been negative for known forms of human prion disease. Due to commonalities in signs and symptoms and the lack of a confirmed diagnosis among cases, a cluster of NSUC has been identified.At the time of referral by their health-care provider, most of the individuals under investigation were living in the southeastern and northeastern regions of New Brunswick, around the Acadian Peninsula and Moncton areas. However, so far our investigation has not found any evidence suggesting that the residents of these regions are more at risk than those living elsewhere in the province.Canadian health-care providers have been alerted to this investigation and are advised to contact New Brunswick Public Health for further information or to make referrals for individual cases.Some symptoms include, but are not limited to:
balance issues, difficulty walking or falls
blurred vision or visual hallucinations
unexplained, significant weight loss
pain in the upper or lower limbs
Read the full notice hereNOTE: What is interesting with the above symptoms is that they are very similar to symptoms reported in people who were sleeping in close proximity to smart meter radiofrequency emissions. Ref: Lamech F, “Self-Reporting of Symptom Development From Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields of Wireless Smart Meters in Victoria”. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25478801/