I also meant to add this summary figure of the statistics with my last post – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2995180/figure/F2/

@admin – Thanks for the references. Lots (*lots*) of uncertainty in those studies, and the statistics are far more in favor of no relationship. That is my reasoning. Sorry, if that came off as disingenuous. I just need to see some data that supports the claim, and I have yet to see that.

Is there uncertainty? Of course.
Is the uncertainty worth addressing? I believe so, for the sake of EHS folks.

But at some point we have to move on; When to move on, I suppose, is up to the individual.

@Richard It might occur to an observer that you are being a bit disingenuous. Science on bioeffects of low-intensity RF is easy to find. Putting aside the fact that the FCC limits transmitters in the SM band to 1 watt, and they are not known for their caution regarding RF, let’s look at power density–the measure of the RF hits an object. To quote from Sage’s letter in reply to the CCST report [sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?p=343]:

“Kundi and Hutter (Pathophysiology, 2009) say they don’t yet find RF health impacts at levels below 0.05 to 0.1 uW/cm2” but do find consistent evidence of adverse health impacts at levels generally above that (based on at least eight cell tower studies conducted internationally). These figures were for healthy adult populations.

“From the CCST Report, figures 1 and 7 (identical) give a comparison of RF levels from various sources, including two estimates for smart meters. They are 4 uW/cm^2 at 10 feet, and 40 uW/cm2 at 3 feet away.”

A few studies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19261451
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19268551
A summary of studies: http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/research/fact_sheet.htm
http://knol.google.com/k/absarul-haque/neurological-effects-of-radiofrequency/1xc61x617bpvo/2#
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20662418

Richard, you are wasting everyone’s time.

Please go do the test on yourself, let us know how it goes.

Until then, you are just wasting our time because NOTHING will convince you short of your brain frying.

That’s nice, Jim. Why am I “a waste of time”? (by which I assume you meant *your* time); Because I don’t agree with your point of view?

“With all the proof available…”

No, the “unclassified” report does nothing to sway my view on SmartMeter radiation. I won’t deny the stated effects of those military devices, but the power levels are incomparable.

Share with me one–just one–piece of scientific literature that actually supports the need for concern over a 2.5 watt transmitter and I’ll listen.

Richard, so the army research doesn’t mean anything to you?

So I guess the only thing that will convince you is what I said to try. So now go stick your head next to a 2.5W transmitter at 900 Mhz with random pulses for days on end and let us know how it goes.

With all the proof available to you on the internet, you still don’t get it?

You sir, are a waste of time.

“Possible is only plausible if the proper research was done.”

Huh?

Richard,

Possible is only plausible if the proper research was done. Please look at the Sutro Tower and the map of the cancer rates around the tower, it gets denser as you get closer to the tower. Im not making this up, if we had RFR experts that were not bought by the corporations owning this technology doing some real research and the research that has been done 3rd party independent from these corporations not being discredited with money, I am sure you would see a much different world than the one we live in. Greed is running a muck in our country. If we feel like listening to third party independent research, we should not be hounded that we are crazy and do not know what we are talking about because most of us, including myself, have done a lot of research on this. Can you really believe the corporations that hold a monopoly in an area when they have lied? No. Have we proven they have lied? Yes. It is up to you if you want to believe an average Joe, like yourself, or a corporation with shareholders they would like to satisfy at any and all costs.

@Rampage _Rick
I remember the 3 watt Motorola “bag phones”. They got out well on the old Rural Mobile Telephone Service (RMTS) networks that were analog. I think those old networks are gone now, but I could be wrong.
Do you remember the old 30 watt mobile telephones used back in the 60’s ? They were vehicle mounted, had about 10 frequencies in the 155 MHz VHF range.
Here in the S.F. bay area, the base station was in Oakland, and we had 3 frequencies to use, they were full duplex. It was mainly important people like broadcast engineers, kingpin mafia and drug movers. rock stars and other business people who thought they were important that had them. But also, people that lived out in the boonies where there were no land lines had them .
Now, there are satellite phones for people out in the middle of nowhere to use, and the telecom corporations are expanding their mobile phone networks to handle the sales of millions on new mobile phones, and also the SmartSync (SmartMeters) being deployed across the U.S.
What has happened is a very complex plan was cooked up by corporate heads, lobbyists, government (FCC) and marketers and manufacturers to promote total saturation of mobile phone networks, the SmartMeters in the U.S. use mobile phone networks to transmit total usage data to the utilities central data centers.
That is the main reason that the lobbyists got the government to say that everyone should have a mobile phone, and try and do away with the land line networks.
Also, Obama was on TV a few months ago saying that we the taxpayers should fund a program so that all residences in the U.S. have a broadband internet connection. This is very good news for the telecom corporations, but many people do not want broadband high speed connections. One reason for the big push is that in the distant future, electric vehicles are hoped to be promoted and selling to the wealthy urban dwellers.
There are plans to use electric vehicle batteries for storage of DC electricity inverted back to AC on the power grid. The special chargers and new E9 electric meters need to send commands and data over broadband cable, the mobile phone networks, and broadband over powerline carrier (BPL).
The corporations and the governments that they control have big plans for all of us in the future, and want to “cover the earth” with RF technology, adding thousands of new mobile phone towers every year. Soon, they hope that there will be no escape from RF mobile phone networks. I did read on the internet that a mobile phone tower only puts out about 100 watts of power, I don’t know if that is true, because I thought that it would be substantially more. But I guess if they put up more towers, they won’t need as much power as before.

That’s a good question, Smarter Meters–“Can someone explain why a Smart Meter needs to send 10,000 (or more) pulses a day to report usage that might be a 2 or 3 digit number (KWH)?”

The answer is that the meters are constantly “pinging” each other to make sure they are all working. Picture a group of people spread out in a park. They are constantly calling to each other, “John, you there?” “Yes, Jane, I’m here.” “Bob, you there?” “Yes, Jane, I’m here.” “Is everything working OK, Bob?” “Yes, Jane, everything is working OK.”

Every one of those communications is a meter pulsing radiation. So while it’s probably true that they only send data every 15 minutes, the meters are still pulsing constantly to ensure that all the meters are online and working properly.