Smart Meters: Correcting the Gross Misinformation

Quebec-based magazine La Maison du 21e siecle asked physician David O. Carpenter, former founding dean of the University at Albany (NY)’s School of Public Health, to comment on a letter published in the Montreal daily Le Devoir last May 24. This letter claimed wireless smart meters pose no risk to public health. Some fourty international experts contributed to the following rebuttal. 

We, the undersigned are a group of scientists and health professionals who together have coauthored hundreds of peer-reviewed studies

Dr David O. Carpenter, founder, University at Albany (NY) School of Public Health

on the health effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs). We wish to correct some of the gross misinformation found in the letter regarding wireless “smart” meters that was published in the Montreal daily Le Devoir on May 24. Submitted by a groupQuebec engineers, physicists and chemists, the letter in question reflects an obvious lack of understanding of the science behind the health impacts of the radiofrequency (RF)/microwave EMFs emitted by these meters.

The statement that « Thousands of studies, both epidemiological and experimental in humans, show no increase in cancer cases as a result of exposure to radio waves of low intensity… » is false (1). In fact, only a few such studies — two dozen case-control studies of mobile phone use, certainly not thousands, have reported no elevations of cancer, and most were funded by the wireless industry. In addition, these reassuring studies contained significant experimental design flaws, mainly the fact that the populations followed were too small and were followed for a too short period of time.

Non industry-funded studies have clearly demonstrated a significant increase in cancer cases among individuals who have suffered from prolonged exposure to low-level microwaves, transmitted notably by radio antennas. The effects were best documented in meta-analyses that have been published and that include grouped results from several different studies: these analyses consistently showed an increased risk of brain cancer among regular users of a cell phone who have been exposed to microwaves for at least ten years.

Brain Cancer Rates
Furthermore, the argument that brain cancer rates do not indicate an overall increase in incidence is not evidence that cell phones are safe: the latency for brain cancer in adults after environmental exposure can be long, up to 20-30 years. Most North Americans haven’t used cell phones extensively for that long. The evidence of the link between long-term cell phone use and brain cancer comes primarily from Northern Europe, where cell phones have been commonly used since the 1990s.

Children are especially at risk. In May 2012, the U.K.’s Office of National Statistics reported a 50 percent increase in incidence of frontal and temporal lobe tumors in children between 1999 and 2009. This statistic is especially disturbing since in May 2011, after reviewing the published scientific literature regarding cancers affecting cell phone users, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency radiation as a 2B, possible human carcinogen. Despite the absence of scientific consensus, the evidence is sufficiently compelling for any cautious parent to want to reduce their loved one’s exposure to RF/microwave emissions as much as possible, as recommended by various countries such as Austria, Belgium, Germany,Russia and the United Kingdom.

Public fears about wireless smart meters are well-founded. They are backed by various medical authorities such as the Public Health Departments of Santa Cruz County (California) and of Salzburg State (Austria). These authorities are worried about the growing number of citizens who say they have developed electrohypersensitivity (EHS), especially since for many of them, the symptoms developed after the installation of such meters (it takes some time for most people to link the two events).

Since the turn of the millennium, people are increasingly affected by ambient microwaves due to the growing popularity of wireless devices such as cell phones and Wi-Fi Internet. Therefore, the mass deployment of smart grids could expose large chunks of the general population to alarming risk scenarios without their consent. According to seven surveys done in six European countries between 2002 and 2004, about 10% of Europeans have become electrosensitive, and experts fear that percentage could reach 50% by 2017. The most famous person to publicly reveal her electrosensitivity is Gro Harlem Brundtland, formerly Prime Minister of Norway and retired Director of the World Health Organization (WHO).

While there is no consensus on the origins and mechanisms of EHS, many physicians and other specialists around the world have become aware that EHS symptoms (neurological dermatological, acoustical, etc.) seem to be triggered by exposure to EMF levels well below current international exposure limits, which are established solely on short-term thermal effects (2). Organizations such as the Austrian Medical Associationand the American Academy of Environmental Medicine have recognized that the ideal way to treat of EHS is to reduce EMF exposure.

Therefore, caution is warranted because the growing variety of RF/microwave emissions produced by many wireless devices such as smart meters have never been tested for their potential biological effects.

Well-known bioeffects
While the specific pathways to cancer are not fully understood, it is scientifically unacceptable to deny the weight of the evidence regarding the increase in cancer cases in humans that are exposed to high levels of RF/microwave radiation.

The statement that « there is no established mechanism by which a radio wave could induce an adverse effect on human tissue other than by heating » is incorrect, and reflects a lack of awareness and understanding of the scientific literature on the subject. In fact, more than a thousand studies done on low intensity, high frequency, non-ionizing radiation, going back at least fifty years, show that some biological mechanisms of effect do not involve heat. This radiation sends signals to living tissue that stimulate biochemical changes, which can generate various symptoms and may lead to diseases such as cancer.

Even though RF/microwaves don’t have the energy to directly break chemical bonds, unlike ionizing radiation such as X-rays, there is scientific evidence that this energy can cause DNA damage indirectly leading to cancer by a combination of biological effects. Recent publications have documented the generation of free radicals, increased permeability of the blood brain barrier allowing potentially toxic chemicals to enter the brain, induction of genes, as well as altered electrical and metabolic activity in human brains upon application of cell phone RF/microwaves similar to those produced by smart meters.

These effects are cumulative and depend on many factors including RF/microwave levels, frequency, waveform, exposure time, biovariability between individuals and combination with other toxic agents. Clear evidence that these microwaves are indeed bioactive has been shown by the fact that low-intensity EMFs have proven clinically useful in some circumstances. Pulsed EMFs have long been used to successfully treat bone fractures that are resistant to other forms of therapy. More recently, frequency-specific, amplitude-modulated EMFs have been found useful to treat advanced carcinoma and chronic pain.

High frequency EMFs such as the microwaves used in cell phones, smart meters, Wi-Fi and cordless ‘‘DECT’’ phones, appear to be the most damaging when used commonly. Most of their biological effects, including symptoms of electrohypersensitivity, can be seen in the damage done to cellular membranes by the loss of structurally-important calcium ions. Prolonged exposure to these high frequencies may eventually lead to cellular malfunction and death.

Furthermore, malfunction of the parathyroid gland, located in the neck just inches from where one holds a cell phone, may actually cause electrohypersensitivity in some people by reducing the background level of calcium ions in the blood. RF/microwave radiation is also known to decrease the production of melatonin, which protects against cancer, and to promote the growth of existing cancer cells.

Early warning scientists attacked
In recommending that the Precautionary Principle be applied in EMF matters, the European Environment Agency’s Director Jacqueline McGlade wrote in 2009: “We have noted from previous health hazard histories such as that of lead in petrol, and methyl mercury, that ‘early warning’ scientists frequently suffer from discrimination, from loss of research funds, and from unduly personal attacks on their scientific integrity. It would be surprising if this is not already a feature of the present EMF controversy… » Such unfortunate consequences have indeed occurred.

The statement in the Le Devoir letter that « if we consider that a debate should take place, it should focus exclusively on the effects of cell phones on health » is basically an acknowledgement that there is at least some reason to be concerned about cell phones. However, while the immediate exposure from a cell phone is of much greater intensity than the exposure from smart meters, cell phone use is temporary.

Smart meters
Wireless smart meters typically produce atypical, relatively potent and very short pulsed RF/microwaves whose biological effects have never been fully tested. They emit these millisecond-long RF bursts on average 9,600 times a day with a maximum of 190,000 daily transmissions and a peak level emission two and a half times higher than the stated safety signal, as the California utility Pacific Gas & Electric recognized before that State’s Public Utilities Commission. Thus people in proximity to a smart meter are at risk of significantly greater aggregate exposure than with a cell phone, not to mention the cumulative levels of RF/microwaves that people living near several meters are exposed to.

People are exposed to cell phone microwaves primarily in the head and neck, and only when they use their device. With smart meters, the entire body is exposed to the microwaves, which increases the risk of overexposure to many organs.

In addition to these erratic bursts of modulated microwaves coming from smart meters that are transferring usage data to electric, gas and water utilities, wireless and wired smart (powerline communication) meters are also a major source of ‘’dirty electricity’’ (electrical interference of high frequency voltage transients typically of kilohertz frequencies). Indeed, some scientists, such as American epidemiologist Sam Milham, believe that many of the health complaints about smart meters may also be caused by dirty electricity generated by the « switching » power supply activating all smart meters. Since the installation of filters to reduce dirty electricitycirculating on house wiring has been found to relieve symptoms of EHS in some people, this method should be considered among the priorities aimed at reducing potential adverse impacts.

Rather be safe than sorry
The apparent adverse health effects noted with smart meter exposure are likely to be further exacerbated if smart appliances that use wireless communications become the norm and further increase unwarranted exposure.

To date, there have been few independent studies of the health effects of such sources of more continuous but lower intensity microwaves. However, we know after decades of studies of hazardous chemical substances, that chronic exposure to low concentrations of microwaves can cause equal or even greater harm than an acute exposure to high concentrations of the same microwaves.

This is why so many scientists and medical experts urgently recommend that measures following the Precautionary Principle be applied immediately — such as using wired meters — to reduce biologically inappropriate microwave exposure. We are not advocating the abolishment of RF technologies, only the use of common sense and the development and implementation of best practices in using these technologies in order to reduce exposure and risk of health hazards.
1. Scientific papers on EMF health effects
2. Explanation and studies on electrosensitivity
3. Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology

• David O. Carpenter, MD, Director, Institute for Health & the Environment, University at Albany, USA
• Jennifer Armstrong, MD, Past President, Canadian Society of Environmental Medicine, Founder, Ottawa Environmental Health Clinic, Ontario, Canada
• Pierre L. Auger, M. D., FRCPC, Occupational medicine, Multiclinique des accidentés 1464, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
• Fiorella Belpoggi, Director Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, Ramazzini Institute, Bologna, Italy
• Martin Blank, PhD, former President, Bioelectromagnetics Society, Special Lecturer, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA
• Barry Breger, MD, Centre d’intégration somatosophique (orthomolecular medicine), Montreal, Quebec
• John Cline, MD, Professor, Institute for Functional Medicine, Federal Way, WA, USA, Medical Director, Cline Medical Centre, Nanaimo, BC, Canada
• Alvaro Augusto de Salles, PhD, Professor of Electrical Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
• Christos Georgiou, Prof. Biochemistry, Biology Department, University of Patras, Greece
• Andrew Goldsworthy, PhD, Honorary lecturer in Biology, Imperial College, London, UK
• Claudio Gómez-Perretta, MD, PhD, Director, Centro de Investigación, Hospital Universitario LA Fe, Valencia, Spain
• Livio Giuliani, PhD, Senior Researcher, National Insurance Institute (INAIL), Chief of Radiation and Ultrasounds Research Unit, Rome, Italy
• Yury Grigoriev, PhD, Chair Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Moscow, Russia
• Settimio Grimaldi, PhD, Director, Institute of Translational Pharmacology (Neurobiology and molecular medicine), National Research Council, Rome, Italy
• Magda Havas, PhD, Centre for Health Studies, Trent University, Canada
• Lennart Hardell, MD, Professor of Oncology, University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden
• Denis L. Henshaw, PhD, Professor of Physics, Head of The Human Radiation Effects Group, University of Bristol, UK
• Ronald B. Herberman, MD, Chairman of Board, Environmental Health Trust, and Founding Director emeritus, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, USA
• Isaac Jamieson, PhD Environmental Science (electromagnetic phenomena in the built environment), independent architect, scientist and environmental consultant, Hertfordshire, UK
• Olle Johansson, PhD, Professor of Neuroscience (Experimental Dermatology Unit), Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
• Yury Kronn, PhD, Soviet authority on physics of nonlinear vibrations and high frequency electromagnetic vibrations, founder of Energy Tools International, Oregon, USA
• Henry Lai, PhD, Professor of Bioengineering, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
• Abraham R. Liboff, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Department of Physics, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA
• Don Maisch, PhD, Researcher on radiation exposure standards for telecommunications frequency, EMFacts Consultancy, Tasmania, Australia
• Andrew A. Marino, MD, PhD, JD, Professor of Neurology, LSU Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, USA
• Karl Maret, MD, M.Eng., President, Dove Health Alliance, Aptos, CA, USA
• Sam Milham, MD, former chief epidemiologist, Washington State Department of Health, USA
• Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, Director, Center for Family and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley
• Gerd Oberfeld, MD, Public Health Department, Salzburg State Government, Austria
• Jerry L. Phillips, PhD, Director, Center for Excellence in Science, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado, USA
• John Podd, PhD, Professor of Psychology (experimental neuropsychology), Massey University, New-Zeland
• William J. Rea, MD, thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon, founder of the Environmental Health Center, Dallas, Tx, USA
• Elihu D. Richter, MD, Professor, Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel
• Leif G. Salford, MD, Senior Professor of Neurosurgery, Lund University, Sweden
• Nesrin Seyhan, MD, Founder and Chair of Biophysics, Medical Faculty of Gazi University, Turkey
• Cyril W. Smith, PhD, lead author of “Electromagnetic Man”, retired from Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Salford, UK
• Morando Soffritti, MD,
Scientific Director of the European Foundation for Oncology and Environmental Sciences “B. Ramazzini” in Bologna, Italy
• Antoinette “Toni” Stein, PhD, Collaborative on Health and the Environment (CHE-EMF Working Group), Co-Coordinator, Berkeley, CA, USA
• Stanislaw Szmigielski, MD, PhD Professor of Pathophysiology, Consulting Expert, former director of Microwave Safety, Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Warsaw, Poland
• Bradford S. Weeks, MD, Director, The Weeks Clinic, Clinton, WA, USA
• Stelios A. Zinelis, MD, Vice-President, Hellenic Cancer Society, Cefallonia, Greece

Coordination: Andre Fauteux, Publisher and Editor in chief, la Maison du 21e siècle magazine, Sainte-Adele, Quebec, Canada.

via Smart Meters: Correcting the Gross Misinformation

  1. I have written to the 4 ministers, or shadows of Health, and of Energy, on this subject, and received replies indicating a lack of understanding and concern on these matters. One stating that no decision will be made before 2014, and consultations taking place this autumn, yet BG already putting meters in, and more damage is being done to health daily by the existing WiFi etc
    They all need a lecture on basic Physics and Biology.Sadly the public are ignorant scientifically, and gullable.

  2. Does anyone know of any device that can help me understand my usage better and help save me money. I dot like crawling in cupboards to read my meter. There must be a better way. I’m sending this by traditional internet connection so if Wendy can tell me how I can do this without getting frazzled by wi fi I wil shbdgsj shdgscbm flzzzz. …….whoops sorry, had a blackout……must be my iPad…. How do I send emails without using a computer Wendy? You arse.

    • Hi IP: ,,

      Yes. it’s called an energy monitor. Available for about £20. Thanks for contributing, have you read what wifi can do to you, Frank? We thought wifi was a good idea too, once.

      • Fair play to you leaving my reply on. It’s a bit much to assume wifi will bring about the mortal doom you imply. I suppose if people start keeling over and glowing in the dark, you will have a point. Til then, this, like global warming, will remain in the fruitcake box to me. If it is such a concern to your health and well being, why not buy a plot of land next to Thelma’s Gypsy Girls, and create an Aimish community. What ailments are you suffering. I have some bottles of Dr. Good I can sell you……..

        • You’re entitled to think, and say, what you like, Frank, in spite of the ad hominem attack you levelled at Wendy. In respect of your point about buying a chunk of land and a caravan, and effectively hitting the eject button; currently, Smart Meters are voluntary, but most people don’t even know what they are, so won’t exercise their right to refuse one. This is good news for the companies pushing it. However, at some point, it is possible that this choice will no longer be available to us. Long before that point, though (in fact it’s looking like it might be NOW), we will be bathing in a sea of microwaves that will be virtually inescapable.

          Your idea of feathering you’re own nest first and taking evasive action, if possible, is fine. For now. But at some point, it won’t be avoidable. And this programme is GLOBAL; in a “global” Smart Grid, where do you run to?

          We don’t suffer from ES, but many people do and their lives are a misery. There’s a view that 30% of the population experience some kind of sensitivity, but don’t realise it – headaches, sleeplessness, fatigue, etc. at the low end of the symptom spectrum. That number is increasing, and so are the symptoms. If you have doubts, as you’re right to have about anything that’s being “sold” to you – like global warming, wifi, Smart Grid, etc., then our recommendation would be to do your own research into it and draw your own conclusions from outside of the sphere of influence that large financial interests have. We’ve published links to details of more than 5,000 studies on this site (listed under Pages) and the effects of electromagnetic radiation and microwaves. We’re not selling you anything here. We can’t say the same for Big Energy, though.

          Finally, whilst it’s not a concern to us that you’ve used a bogus email address to post here (and you already know that your IP address is logged), your action does show that there are some things many individuals would rather not let the world know about, and that there are things we like to keep private. It’s one of the reasons some of us wear clothes. In the ‘Smart’ Grid, though, every item in your house will have its own individual IP address, connected to and monitored by a Smart Meter. And it won’t be us on the end of *that* computer. It will be some highly sophisticated data modelling software and profit-hungry corporations seeking to interpret it.

          You might not have anything you wish to hide, but the evidence suggests you do – as many of us do. It looks like we just don’t appreciate it yet.

  3. Of course I wouldn’t leave my email on here – why would I, and apologies to the real Frank, if you have been pestering him. I think you are bonkers. The reference to wearing clothes is infantile at best. I don’t give a toss that my ip address is logged, as you state. Makes me laugh though that you are whining about this form of behaviour from Profit hungry corporations as you put it , then displaying the same sort of threatening behaviours you believe they do. My view is that Luddites like you simply stifle progress and would have been on the Jarrow march. Believe what you like, it keeps you busy I guess. I just wonder how you manage to cope going to work, using phones, using email, operating your key fob for your car, using a microwave oven, going on holiday through an airport and the thousands of other things that contribute to The sea of microwaves. Smart metering is minuscule by comparison I think and I would quite like one.
    However, you are quite right about the comment I left earlier, which was uncalled for and for which I unreservedly apologise. I doubt I will post again, but good luck in your quest = I do think you will need it.

    • Why WOULDN’T you put your email here, Frank? Do you value having some privacy online? Do you value having privacy at home? Good luck with the latter – if you take a Smart Meter, as you imply, you’ll be forfeiting it. I drew your attention to your bogus email/IP address (which is done automatically on WordPress, incidentally) to demonstrate a point – that we have things that we would rather not share. Unfortunately, decisions around this are being made for us. Do you agree with that principal? The same applies to our analogy of wearing clothes – and we’re fine that your opinion on its validity as an argument differs from ours. Some people have an opinion about how much energy you and I should be using. And those people want their opinion enforced upon you. You say that you don’t agree with anthopogenic global warming theory – but you’re wanting to take a Smart Meter which is being promoted as the miracle (false) solution to it. But studies have repeatedly shown that Smart Meters don’t lead to a reduction in consumption. Energy monitors that you can buy online for about £20 allow you to become more aware of what energy you’re using and how – it does the same job as a Smart Meter’s in-home display but without you risking your privacy, your health, higher bills, and so on – so why is it you are so in favour of Smart Meters? Why do you suppose these non-networked energy monitors aren’t being promoted as the solution?

      Regarding your accusation of us being luddites; the additional ad hominem aside, is this a website? Are we using technology right now? What kind of progress is it you’re talking about and that you see taking shape today? Do you think, on the whole, people are getting healthier, for example? What does progress mean to you, and to what end, exactly?

      You are right that it’s difficult avoiding these technologies, but that’s part of the problem. When you say Smart Meters are minuscule by comparison, are you aware of how they can pulse at up to 190,000 times in a 24 hour period, and be up to 800 times stronger than cell phones? How often do you use your cell phone? 190,000 times a day? Does your phone have an off-switch, and are you capable of pressing it? If so, then there is a stark difference between that and the Smart Meter you want. That’s your decision though (and also your neighbours’).

  4. Last one, promise. Are people healthier today? I guess so, if longevity is anything to go by. Why won’t I post my email address – because I don’t want to be bombarded with emails. Big difference than having a water meter sending out readings to a company. I would rather have that, than someone calling into my home to read the thing. . You are good at posting links – why not post the websites of actual products that pulse out 190000 signals in 24 hours and state the power outage so I can check for myself as I can’t find these. I have searched the internet for smart water meters and they all seem battery powered with low volt batteries. In fact my meter is in the footpath outside in a hole and it is a pain to read it myself. They just seem like radios stuck on the meter to me, so I can’t see a problem. Millions of smart phones, sat navs, pc’s and tablets are sold every single day. why are you ok wih these, but not a meter? I still think it’s a good idea. My bill would be right and I don’t have somebody ferreting round under my hall cupboard reading my meter every few months.

    • Are people healthier? Not if you look at the health of the pharmaceutical industry. According to this report from CNN (a quick search – it’s from 2008) pharmaceuticals was the third biggest industry in the world – and I don’t think that even includes Dr Good’s… (etworks and communications was number 1 – go figure). As the Children With Cancer conference in London in May reported, childhood brain cancer is up by 50% in the last ten years. Autism now affects IRO 1 in 30 children when just a few decades ago this was around 1 in 10,000. ADHD is on the increase and wasn’t even known about just a few years ago. Cancer is increasing across the board. Alzheimers cases are growing significantly. There is a diabetes epidemic. It doesn’t appear as though we are getting healthier at all.

      Regarding outputs, this video that we posted discusses a document obtained under court order in California; It showed that “Meter Read Data” was sent 6 times a day, “Network Management” messages were sent 30 times a day, “Time Synch” messages 360 times a day and “Mesh Network Msg Mgt” 190,000 times a day. They emphasised the “weighted average duty cycle” at only a few minutes in the document – because the bursts are so short. However, there is a huge body of evidence – which is growing – that these pulses are particularly harmful to human biology. Have a look at the video.

      Re: specifications, here is a Smart Water Meter we believe Thames Water are trialling:
      They say it “utilizes licensed frequencies in the radio spectrum to broadcast at an industry-leading 30 watts of power” – that’s 30 times more powerful than the average Smart Meter. BG have been asked to provide exposure values, safe distances, etc. If (and when) we receive this information, we’ll let you know.

      Regarding your point about “smart” phones, [wireless] PCs, sat navs, etc being sold – when did we say we were OK with them? These technologies use the same kind of wireless communications that Smart Meters do – and there are some long-standing groups out there trying to make people aware of the dangers of them like we are with Smart Meters. We’ve posted some of their articles and studies here. Have a look at Dr Henry Lai’s presentation on our site on DNA fragmentation from cell phone exposure. Some of the groups raising awareness about EMR in general are listed on our blogroll. But Smart Meters impact on more than our health, as we’ve said. Our privacy is at stake. Sovereignty in the home is at stake. Safety is at stake. There is a huge threat from hacking and remote disconnects with an internet-enabled energy grid.

      And you might get more accurate bills – although our recent post about the Smart Meter scandal in Australia shows evidence contrary to that – but the reality is that these energy companies are seeking a profit and if that’s the case, do you think your bills will go up or down? If they were looking at losing money with Smart Meters, do you think they’d be offering you one? A one year study in Toronto, Canada, showed that 80% of bills went UP after Smart Meter installations – and some by more than 50%. The industry talk is about Smart Meters being able to deliver “new tariffs” and it’s likely that these tariffs will be applied using extremely sophisticated data mining and modelling software to ensure continually bigger profits. Accurate readings or not. And like we say, you can get an energy monitor for next to nothing online – so you could put an end to fiddling under the sink right away.