Health and Safety Information

The Health and Safety Dangers of RF Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation 

Smart Meters are dangerous in many ways, even if one is exposed to only a single meter. We are more concerned with the clusters of Smart Meters in our condo complex. Because of the panel configurations, and routing of each signal through all the meters in that panel, the total radiation is many times, perhaps hundreds of times, greater than the radiation from a single meter.

Some people get sick after Smart Meters have been installed. Health problems include the following. Do you have any of these symptoms?

·      Nausea and vomiting

·      Agitation

·      Migraines

·      Dizziness and disorientation

·      Tinnitus, ringing in ears, buzzing

·      Auto-immune problems

·      Insomnia, sleep problems

·      Ear pain

·      Seizures

·      Heart rhythm disturbances

·      Nose bleeds

·      Pacemaker defibrillation

·      Rashes

·      Depression

·      Suicidal thoughts

·      Anxiety and other mood disorders

·      Eye problems

·      Increased blood pressure

·      Physical weakness and / or pain

·      Decline of health

·      Pulsing or pressure sensations

·      Cognitive problems including worsening memory

·      Concentration and “brain log”

·      Flu-like symptoms

·      Urinary problems

·      Hair loss

·      Blackouts

·      Developing sensitivity to other electronics and wireless radiation

A Doctor’s Point of View

I am both a physician and scientist by training and feel that the issue regarding removal of the so-called “Smart Meters” requires your immediate attention.

Specifically, my expertise is in the Cardiac arena; having worked as a Cardiac Anesthesiologist for over 20 years, and more remotely, having done extensive research (with publications in peer reviewed journals) in areas of cardiac drug research, cardiac physiology and cardiac pathology. In addition to my anesthesia training, I completed a Pathology residency. In short, I feel my experience in clinical medicine and scientific research makes me amply qualified to read the scientific literature and understand human disease.

It is my opinion that the issue regarding removal of the so-called “Smart meters” requires your immediate attention.

Recently, I have reviewed some of the literature regarding the dangers of electromagnetic radiation, both in general and specifically, with regards to the health hazards of “Smart meters”. To be perfectly candid, the relative risk (i.e.“How dangerous is it?”) of exposure to this source of electromagnetic radiation is not completely clear. In my opinion, the results are mixed and the literature is not definitive- “cause and effect” is always very difficult to prove.  However, it has been my experience that when conclusions in the literature are not clear cut, it often means that the field is in the process of sorting out numerous confounders, which blur the data. Take for example, early research on smoking, radon, formaldehyde, etc.

What I am willing to definitively state, is that when the appropriate studies are done, I will be extremely surprised if various forms of electromagnetic radiation are NOT linked to promoting or causing different forms of human disease.

It is my position, that while the negative health effects of the “Smart meters “ are  not completely clear, what is absolutely clear in my mind, is that there is more than sufficient data to warrant concern with the situation at Marinero Circle.

Don’t take it from me, The World Health Organization /International Agency for Research on Cancer  went on record as classifying radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) as: ”Group 2B-Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans.” We demonstrated with spot monitoring of EMF at the Marinero site, that the bank of Smart Meters (both Electrical and Gas) are generating substantial and continuous levels of radiation. Is this situation dangerous? At this juncture, no one can be absolutely sure.

But, based on the current state of the scientific evidence, erring on the side of caution and promptly replacing the meters would seem to be the only prudent course of action.

I refer you to the attached 2014 US District Court opinion that states:
“If there is even a reasonable possibility that cell phone radiation is carcinogenic, the time for action in the public health and regulatory sectors is upon us. Even though the financial and social costs of restricting such devices would be significant, those costs pale in comparison to the cost in human lives from doing nothing, only to discover thirty or forty years from now that the early signs were pointing in the right direction. If the probability of carcinogenicity is low, but the magnitude of the potential harm is high, good public policy dictates that the risk should not be ignored.”

I base this assertion on:

  1. Time and further research will likely yield more definitive data on the relative risk of such continuous, multi-bank meter exposure. However, it is a substantial gamble to wait for such results.
  2. The Faraday cage (wire mesh) approach to containment does not strike me as a reasonable approach to the large banks of meters, as found at Marinero Circle and 99 Lyford Drive. It would be unsightly, drawing undue attention to the problem and would not directly address the problem. Effectively, it just “covers it up”.
  3. In addition, the Faraday cage approach does not address the significant potential fire risk, in case of a substantial earthquake.
  4. Finally, the cost of actually removing and replacing the bank of “Smart meters” is ridiculously low for the benefit of removing ALL concern of the health risks of such a radiation source.

Perhaps I should remind you that Nobel Laureate Marie Curie died of leukemia, most likely due to her exposure to ionizing radiation, during her breakthrough research; the risk of which was not fully appreciated during her time.

With all of this in mind, I urge all homeowners to address this potentially significant health risk and remove the “Smart Meters”  expeditiously.

Thank you.
Sincerely,
Joseph Romson MD PhD

An Environmental Attorney’s Point of View

The Trump Federal Communications Commission recently reissued its 1996 rules which are based solely on heat measurements.  That level, which does keep people from overheating, frying or roasting has been repeatedly shown to be well above the levels that cause cancer.  There have been no reports showing that radiation at the FCC-approved level is safe.  The toxicity of radiation was extensively tested and reported by the (NTP) National Toxicology Program, under the management of NIH (National Institute of Health) in 2018.

We are advised since 2018 there have been NO reports from ANY neutral, peer-reviewed US source or agency showing that radiation from smart meters is safe.  There are reportedly hundreds of reports to the contrary, reporting on the extent of injuries received from non-ionizing EMF radiation (the type emitted from smart meters and cell phone antennas).  All of the federal agencies and academic reports on the subject now agree.

Our Condo Board’s position is not supported by any federal agency or academic post-2018 report, except the Trump FCC. Changes may come with Biden’s FCC appointments. Also, the FCC Regs have been challenged as arbitrary and capricious (and therefore invalid) by the EHT (Environmental Health Trust), and other organizations. See EHT v. FCC, (DC Court of Appeals), especially see the EHT brief.

Last month, doctors and researchers speaking at the international EMF Medical Conference 2021 said the current FCC standards are “laughable”.  Standards set in most other countries, (excepting Canada and Japan) are lower, sometimes hundreds of times lower, than the current FCC standards.  Smart Meters were shown to be the EMF device responsible for most reports of EMF illness.

When one of conference panels commented on a case where a condo board would not remove panels of Smart Meters, the panel’s response was — Remove the Smart Meters or Move Out!  It can save your life! We recommend you vote to remove the smart meters so that none of us need to consider moving out to save our lives.
– Gary Widman, Esq.

Expert Report by Former U.S. Government Official Concludes High Probability Radiofrequency Radiation Causes Brain Tumors 

 
Christopher J. Portier, Ph.D., former director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and a scientific advisor for the World Health Organization (WHO), recently completed an expert report on brain tumor risk from exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation used in cellphone technology.
After completing a comprehensive review of the scientific literature, Dr. Portier concluded:
“In my opinion, RF exposure probably causes gliomas and neuromas and, given the human, animal and experimental evidence,

I assert that, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, the probability that RF exposure causes gliomas and neuromas is high.”

The 176-page report contains 443 references. The report was prepared for the plaintiffs in a major product liability lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia against the telecommunications industry (Murray et al. v Motorola, Inc. et al.).

A summary of the report’s findings and a link to download the report can be found at: http://bit.ly/PortierSaferemr

An excerpt from an article in The Washington Spectator on 12/28/20:

Alarmed about the hazards from wireless devices, 254 scientists from 44 countries have urged the United Nations to toughen the exposure guidelines and “educate the public about the health risks.” The U.N. has not replied.

With the advent of 5G, warnings are even stronger: By October 2020, 407 scientists and physicians appealed to the European Commission “to halt the roll-out of 5G . . . which will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.” This has also been ignored.

How Big Wireless Duped the World re: the Hazards of RF/MW Radiation

By Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie, THE NATION, March 29, 2018

How Big Wireless Duped the World re: the Hazards of RF/MW Radiation

Wireless radiation has been shown to damage the blood-brain barrier, a vital defense mechanism that shields the brain from carcinogenic chemicals elsewhere in the body (resulting, for example, from secondhand cigarette smoke). Wireless radiation has also been shown to interfere with DNA replication, a proven progenitor of cancer. In each of these cases, the risks are higher for children: Their skulls, being smaller, absorb more radiation than adults’ skulls do, while children’s longer life span increases their cumulative exposure.

The wireless industry has sought to downplay hazards of Wireless, and the Federal Communications Commission has followed its example.

The scientific evidence that cell phones and wireless technologies in general can cause cancer and genetic damage is not definitive, but it is abundant and has been increasing over time.

Contrary to the impression that most news coverage has given the public, 90 percent of the 200 existing studies included in the National Institutes of Health’s PubMed database on the oxidative effects of wireless radiation have found a significant impact, according to a survey of the scientific literature conducted by Henry Lai. Seventy-two percent of neurological studies and 64 percent of DNA studies have also found effects.

How Big Wireless Convinced Us Cell Phones and Wi-Fi are Safe

By Project Censored, October 2, 2018

https://scientists4wiredtech.com/2018/10/how-big-wireless-convinced-us-cell-phones-and-wi-fi-are-safe/

A Kaiser Permanente study (published December 2017 in Scientific Reports) conducted controlled research testing on hundreds of pregnant women in the San Francisco Bay area and found that those who had been exposed to magnetic field (MF) non-ionizing radiation associated with cell phones and wireless devices had 2.72 times more risk of miscarriage than those with lower MF exposure.

Furthermore, the study reported that the association was “much stronger” when MF was measured “on a typical day of participants’ pregnancies.”