Collateral Damage: Speaking Out Against Wireless Harm

By Anonymous

For those of you obsessed with your wireless technology, I need to ask–why are my children and I considered acceptable collateral damage so you can have your wireless convenience? Have you utterly lost your sense of humanity? Maybe you don’t feel any health effects (yet) from this technology, but many of us do–millions of us–and we are suffering. Do you not care? I want to know why you don’t care. I want to know why your wireless gadgets are worth more to you than my children’s health or my health or our lives. What in God’s name is so important about your texting that we have become inconsequential?

You wouldn’t force a child who is allergic to peanuts to live in a home filled with peanuts, would you? Would you force a peanut-allergic child to endure such a potentially deadly assault on their immune system? But Super WiFi, smart meters, WiFi, etc. are essentially doing just that to people like us who are sensitive. Perhaps you don’t acknowledge the problem because the radiation is invisible (you can at least SEE peanuts). Yet we are being bombarded by toxic radiation everywhere we go, whether we like it or not–and we have become inconsequential because you want what you want: your wireless convenience. I want to know why–even if you are seemingly unaffected by this technology–I want to know why you don’t care about those of us who ARE affected.

I want to know why you think it is okay for me to get severe migraines every time I have to go into a public place that uses WiFi. Nowadays, that means a debilitating migraine nearly every single day. I want to know why you think it is okay for my child to be drowning in his own mucus and struggling to breathe because his immune system goes berserk when he’s exposed to this radiation. I want to know why you think it is okay that my other child has profound memory loss, insomnia, and can’t think straight due to these frequencies. Or didn’t you know that pulsed microwave radiation (now classified as a Class 2B carcinogen) causes these symptoms??? Well now you know, and according to experts nearly 35% of the population (50% by 2017) is in the same boat as us with these or other symptoms (although most don’t even know what’s making them sick). I want to know why you are not speaking out on our behalf. Because now that you know, there is no excuse. You are, by your silence, saying it is okay for us to suffer. Please tell me how to explain to my children that you having wireless convenience is more important than their health or their lives. Please tell me as a mother how to cope with watching my children needlessly suffer. Try to put yourself in my shoes.

I don’t care if this technology is “popular” or if “everyone is using it”; this is not okay. It is not okay to say “well it’s not going away so you’ll just have to live with it.” Many of us who are sick from this radiation are now too ill to speak out. Many of us struggle just to find a safe place to live, shop, or go to school. We can’t even safely go to a doctor or a hospital without getting seriously ill because of WiFi exposure. There are electrosensitive people living in tents in the mountains and the deserts of our country because they can’t live anywhere else due to the amount of radiation in our communities.

I post info on this subject all the time. Some of you read it (thank you if you do), but I’m sure many of you don’t bother because you’re not affected (yet) or you haven’t figured out that your health problems are being caused by it. Or maybe you just don’t want to hear it because you love your wireless gadgets so much. But what about those of us who are fully aware this technology is making us sick? Do we not matter to you? Maybe it’s just easier for you to think we are imagining it. Well if you think you’re not affected, think again.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of kids dying from leukemia, cancer, and brain tumors (are they perhaps sitting underneath a wireless access point at school? using a cell phone themselves? or just frying in Mom or Dad’s car while the parents use their cell phone?) Now, appallingly, I see parents giving their toddlers SmartPhones to keep them busy and help them “get through the day.” I am sick of cell towers going up outside schools and residential neighborhoods. I’m sick of Distributed Antenna System (DAS) units (the equivalent of a cell antenna) being installed on the telephone wires right outside people’s bedroom windows–and they don’t even know because the radiation is invisible.

I’m disgusted by the number of children being drugged for “ADHD” and “behavior problems” (how can they think or behave properly when bombarded by whole-body radiation from WiFi at school???) I’m sick of getting yet another phone call that my sister, my cousin, or my friend has breast cancer (oh that’s right, they have a wireless digital utility meter on their house, WiFi in their home/office, and/or they use a cell phone). I’m tired of hearing about my friends’ husbands dying from kidney and bladder cancer (can you say laptop???)

I want to know where all the bees have gone (they used to be EVERYWHERE when we were kids). I want to know how the hell we’re going to grow food if all the pollinators are dead! I’m tired of flocks of birds dropping dead out of the sky, and millions of bats (also pollinators) dying of mysterious fungal diseases (the immune system cannot function properly in the presence of these frequencies). If you think you’re not affected by all this, please think again.

Please care enough to acknowledge that this technology is essentially free license to commit genocide in slow motion against those of us who cannot tolerate these frequencies. And you or your child may be next if/when your body can’t tolerate it anymore either. So please have the moral fortitude and common human decency to do something about it, because those of us who are getting sick from it can’t do it alone anymore. We need your help. The problem has gotten too big and soon there will be no escaping it (see below–Super WiFi is on its way). If you are truly a human being, start acting like one. Please don’t accept what is happening to your fellow human beings. Please care about me and my kids and others like us. Please care about those who are being affected and don’t even realize it yet. Please do something about this.

It is not okay to essentially cripple and/or kill off an entire segment of the population for the sake of wireless convenience. We, as a species, should be better than that.

If you’ve gotten this far, thanks for reading. And if you agree, pass it on.

Some links about recent developments in wireless proliferation:

White Space Wifi

Super 5G WiFi

The Coming WiFi Revolution, a planet bathed in WiFi

Cell Phone Use Reduces Empathy for Others

A call to resist the saturation of residential neighborhoods with wireless broadband antennas (DAS)

Cell Phone Radiation Impacts Male Fertility

Cell Phone Use Harms Unborn Babies

Wired and Tired: Electronics and Sleep Disturbance in Children

This entry was posted in Bees, Cancer, Cell phones, Citizen rebellion, Democracy, Electro-Hyper-Sensitivity, health effects, radio-frequency radiation. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Collateral Damage: Speaking Out Against Wireless Harm

  1. Josh says:

    Perhaps the widespread unwillingness to acknowledge the realities of microwave-induced damage to biological systems can tell us something important about human nature, or at least about human psychological response when faced with an overwhelming and systemic problem. The question is, what is it?

    Whatever it is, it’s something that the anti-wireless movement is going to have to take into account if it wants to make any real headway with the mainstream.

    • Richard says:

      Or perhaps the mainstream just isn’t convinced of “the realities of microwave-induced damage to biological systems”. I’m keeping my finger on the pulse of this issue, but I have not yet seen any compelling evidence to suggest that consumer-level wireless technology is harmful.

      I do, however, have a research-related question for you all… If you had the opportunity to conduct a long-term, recurrent survey (say weekly?) of people that were soon to be (but not yet) exposed to a campus-wide wireless network, then what questions would you pose? What are the most frequently reported/prevalent symptoms that sensitive people report? What questions would best gauge the potential health effects/changes before versus after the system goes live?

      Thanks in advance for any constructive input.

      • Josh says:

        If I were to conduct a periodic survey on health effects from a new campus wi-fi network, I might ask the following questions:

        How often do you experience the following symptoms?

        difficulty concentrating
        difficulty remembering things
        skin problems (acne, eczema)
        loss of appeptite
        cardiovascular problems (i.e. heart palpitations)
        sleep disturbance
        anxiety/emtional discomfort
        tinnitus (ringing in ears)

        Do any of these symptoms appear to get better worse or better in a particular location (such as at home or at school, or in different parts of the campus)?
        yes (explain) / no

        Do any of these symptoms appear to get better or worse when you are in close proximity to wireless devices or infrastructure (such as when you use a cell phone, or sit near a classmate who is using the wi-fi)?
        yes (explain) / no

        Do you have a wireless network that you use at home?

        I would add that at the university I attend, the faculty often appear to be more susceptible to these types of effects than the students (perhaps because the students are younger and their biology is more able to repair the damage being done to it). The students who use wireless gadgets a lot often seem somewhat “zombified”—only half there, but otherwise functional. It’s the faculty who exhibit more of the classic cognitive symptoms of ES (difficulty with memory and concentration, sine becomes cosine in the middle of presenting a problem, etc.).

        As for the mainstream not being convinced as to the reality of the biological effects of microwaves, it is quite obvious that they are not. The question, again, is what it might take to get through to them. As my dad might say, “people believe what they want to believe.” If you’re sincerely interested in learning more about this topic, I suggest the following links:

        Science: (read the summary for the public)



        I hope this info is useful. Magda Havas (link above) might be a good person to get in touch with if you’d like some professional input on your survey.

        • Richard says:

          Thanks for the survey suggestions. I prefer to steer clear of the questions that might lead participants to associate their symptoms with wireless systems. The idea would be to assess the occurrence of symptoms and then see if there is any significant change after the system goes live. The design of an unbiased survey is a challenge, so I appreciate your suggestions; they are food for thought.

          Having been an educator, I can say that slip-swapping similar, related, or opposite terms while teaching is nothing unusual. Maybe I’ve done it more often than average, but I don’t blame that on wireless fatigue…I’d dare say that my lifestyle and work experience has been *far less wireless* than average.

          I have been “sincerely interested in learning more about this topic” and I am familiar with most of the links you provided–and while I respect the precautionary approach proposed in the bioinitiative report, I continue to seek a *compelling body of evidence* to support the claim of adverse health effects due to consumer-level wireless technology. It’s just not there…Or if it is, then I just can’t see it. Blinded by real science, or lack thereof.

          • Sure, you could try to devise a non-biased study, but a college campus is probably not an ideal place to do what you’re talking about. Turning on this new network is not going to dramatically change things for 99% of the students. They already have cell phones, wireless gaming consoles, their own wireless routers, or have figured out how to turn on wireless sharing through their computer. Where you would be more likely to note changes are in places where an access point is located within 10 feet of a dorm room or office, where someone spends a considerable amount of their time. Just like cell towers and smart meters, the closer you are, the more quickly you get sick. Symptoms will be more noticeable when your body is trying to rest. If you know where the antennas are located, then your “test subjects” are near by.

            With any environmental contaminant, there’s going to be a correlation between the duration and concentration of exposure and onset of typical symptoms. RF is no different. Whether or not existing or future evidence is ever compelling enough to you subjectively, measuring EMF levels would be an excellent place to start for someone with a healthy amount of skepticism.

            The “show me the proof” reaction is pretty common, which is better than believing everything you hear or read. For many of us, the proof hasn’t come in the form of reading an indisputable peer-reviewed epidemiological or medical report, but by simply measuring the fields we’re exposed to on a daily basis.

            It’s easy to say, “well the scientists can’t prove it and most people don’t seem to mind wireless,” but it’s much harder to ignore the change in your head and chest if you spend 24 hours in a low RF environment, followed by 24 hours in an elevated environment.

            If you don’t have the $100 to buy a meter like the one on the right, borrow someone’s WiFi router, set it up as an open network, place it under your pillow for a week and see how well you sleep.

          • Soapbox Jill says:

            You choose to discount the thousands of studies showing biological effects and harm, including the BioInitiative Report list, the U.S. military list compiled in the 1970s by Zory R. Glaser (see Magda Havas site), the 1994 USAF report on RF biological effects:
            Also contact the American Academy of Environmental Medicine for more studies which they base their stance against smart meters on.
            Then, look at statements from many people who report symptoms from smart meter installations in California, including Steve Halpern in Marin County, who experienced symptoms before the utility said they were going to install the meter. His symptoms actually corresponded with the EARLIER unannounced installation of the meter.
            This is just a sample of the information you are choosing to ignore as an excuse to play Russian Roulette with public health. (Hey, those Russian studies of rf on humans are worth looking at too!)

          • Josh says:

            This perception of a lack of “compelling” evidence among otherwise rational people (such as, as far as I can tell from your comments, yourself) is exactly what I’m talking about when I propose that some consideration be given to the psychology of mass denial by people in the anti-wireless movement.

            If thousands of people from all over the world who have never met or talked to one another (and, in many cases, had never heard of ES prior to developing it) all independently report similar effects when exposed to similar stimuli, what is the rational conclusion? As science writer Blake Levitt puts it, “it’s not likely a transcultural mass-hallucination.”

            I suspect that, for many people who hear about this problem, it simply cannot be true because the idea that wireless tech could have these kinds of effects is simply too terrifying to contemplate. In the case of scientifically-minded people, this base need for denial gets rationalized as “a lack of compelling evidence.” In the less sophisticated, it gets rationalized as “those people are just crazy.” Either way, in my opinion, what we’re really dealing with is the fear that maybe those who have these experiences are sane people who are simply telling the truth. The challenge, then, becomes how to talk about the reality of the situation without simply running into the wall of people’s inability to accept the unacceptable.

          • Richard says:

            @SM – I do have access to an isotropic (triaxial) meter, and I am intrigued by the fields that we cannot see, but I wouldn’t consider that knowledge to be “proof” of anything, except that the fields exist.

            “…borrow someone’s WiFi router, set it up as an open network, place it under your pillow for a week…” >>Now, really, why would I do that?!

            @SJ – An excerpt from the USAF report: “The animals were exposed to a 918 MHz RF/MW source at power density levels of 10, 20, and 40 mW/cm2. Clinical observation showed that **baseline responses remained unchanged for irradiation at the lower power density levels of 10 and 20 mW/cm2**. ”

            And that’s at least 100,000 times the power density limit suggested in the Bioinitiative report (0.100 uW/cm2). So I don’t get the big deal over ~10 uW/cm2 chirping once in a while from a SmartMeter.

            How else can a rational person digest this data which you cite as evidence?

            @Josh – “In the case of scientifically-minded people, this base need for denial…”

            A base need for denial…really? Is that really a fair statement? Or maybe we could just agree that the jury is still out on the health effects of wireless technology. You say we are fearful of the true experiences of sane people; and we just want to see these claims substantiated beyond a reasonable doubt.

          • @ Richard: You know full well that a consensus on this issue is highly unlikely due to the financial interests and psychology of previous investments.

            If you really want to understand what microwave sickness is, why not just expose yourself? Or you could remain on the fence and keep asking others to spell it out for you.

          • Richard says:

            @SM – I agree that a consensus on the issue is highly unlikely, but the movement has no chance (p=0.0) without something more than anecdotal evidence. To be clear, I don’t deny that a small segment of the population *may* be hypersensitive to EM fields, and I don’t mean to take away from anyone’s plight; but if it is real, then it should be testable–and more importantly: verifiable.

            And I don’t need it spelled out for me; I can listen, read, and think. Your opinion may vary.

          • @ Richard: Some people hear anecdotes, others hear cries for help.

            Just keep seeding this site with ambiguity and uncertainty and some day your movement towards the muddled middle might take root.

          • Richard says:

            TYPO: I think was SM meant was “We’ll just keep seeding this site with ambiguity and uncertainty and some day our movement might take root.”

      • Electra says:

        So it sounds like you think problems with wireless are “all in your head”? Kind of like the research you’ve done on the matter.

        I know it’s a hassle, but you really should jog around the internets and look up the research that is out there on the serious repercussions of long-term exposure to radiofrequency radiation. Try looking at the Bioinitiative Report, to start: If you’re really interested in the truth, you’ll find your way from there.

        • Richard says:

          If you’d read my other posts in this thread, and on this site, you’d know that I’ve read the BIReport…Read it; Found it interesting (not scary); Still not convinced of the “serious repercussions”. The problem is that people keep referring me to things (like Jill did, above) to the USAF report, and the data just don’t support the claims. I am following up on the references provided by Minn. below; and with an open mind, not just to poke holes in it.

  2. Soapbox Jill says:

    What does this denial show? For one, that many are simply not informed with the facts. It is difficult for the facts to get to them. Then, they hate to think they are not being protected by those in charge. They believe in the FCC or whatever. There is also the reality of selfish human nature, to do what they want regardless of impact on anyone else.
    Educating people about this is like walking on eggshells. You don’t want to “offend” or scare them, but you want them to know…

  3. Monique says:

    After reading your comments Anon on “Collateral Damage: Speaking Out Against Wireless Harm”, I can empathize with your sense of distrust, hurt and pain. As I am one of many who do not have all of the facts about wireless ‘techno’ harm, I do understand it is a growing problem and that we are all affected in some way. Some more than others like yourself and children. It would be nice if half the population at once all stood together united on the issue, it will take patience and tenacity on your part, and everyone else who is being directly affected. Consider yourself fortunate that you do have the conscious mind to know what is happening to you, many of us do not. And that is where the ignorance comes in. The population who uses laptops, cell phones and other electronic devices do not use intentionally to hurt others, the claims and statements you have made will only push us further away because we have been branded as ‘intentional harm-doers’ when reality is many of us unconsciously do what we do in everyday life. I do not purposely go out of my way to use my laptop to hurt someone else even though there is electromagnetic flow happening, it is something I have not thought about. You have given me something to think about, and yes, perhaps it is harming me in some way.
    Be mindful and careful of the direction of your anger, it can be turned back to you in much more frustrating ways. With that said, I wish for your pain and suffering to subside, that you may have some faith and a sense of peace daily in your life, and your children’s as well. Take care.

    • Soapbox Jill says:

      Monique, the simple truth is some people are electromagnetically sensitive, feeling symptoms from the damage and effects on their bodies. This is like cigarette smoke in that not everyone was sensitive. But with cigarette smoke, you could always leave a room or place. Wireless cuts through walls. Some of us get symptoms from neighbors’ Wifi or other people’s cell phones when they are sending/receiving near us.
      How can we help others understand they are hurting us? We would like to be able to use libraries, gyms, churches and other public places, too, without getting headaches, brain fog, aching, weak joints, heart palpitations, etc. What would you suggest could be done?
      Thank you so much for your input, since you and other wireless users have so much power. We don’t want to force you. The problem is that the stuff wireless does is not bad, it is communication and information. But the mode of delivery is killing us. How can we share the world together?
      Bless you and yours.

  4. Electra says:

    I’m not sure what the problem is. The sociopaths, they are always with us, I guess.

    I need to ask all Georgians to call Senator Don Balfour, chairman of the Georgia Senate Rules Committee. He has an opt out bill before him, Senate Bill 459. He needs to send it along to be voted on by Wednesday, or there will be no chance of an opt out bill until next January. His phone number is 404-656-0095, and his email is Thank you so much, and please visit for more information.

  5. Robert Williams says:


    It may be more inconvenient for people sensitive to this wireless non-ionizing radiation at this time, but most of you will change your lives to minimize your exposure.

    People who are NOT currently sensitive will NOT avoid exposure and smart meters will be attached to their homes so their exposure will be relentless 24/7 365 days per year.

    PG$E, Northern California’s Utility Monopoly, recently admitted (and reluctantly submitted documents to the administrative judge at the Public Utility Commission that reveal) that each electric smart meter transmits radiation 10’s of thousands of times, up to 190,000 times each day. This is thousands of times more radiation magnitude and exposure than PG$E continues to falsely report to customers and the media.

    The Santa Cruz County State of California Health Department SMART METER report January 2012 confirms that radiation from smart meters results in (1) Cell Damage, (2) DNA Chain breaks and (3) Breaches in the blood-brain barrier.

    Over time, people not sensitive to microwave radiation will accumulate considerable radiation and reproduction problems and brain damage may occur.

    But the attack on the general immune system will likely effect even greater numbers of people. No person will be unaffected. The problems and symptoms in each person will vary considerably because bodies are complex and each person’s body is unique and has their own weak points. This will assist the utilities to continue to deny that smart meter radiation is the problem, since the public expects every person to have the identical disease.

    How long this will take is uncertain. People who were not previously sensitive are becoming sensitive in only months time from when they felt nothing, so three to fifteen years is more likely than 30 years. Children, who have many years to live their lives, will unfortunately be the most affected.

    In 50 years from now, non-ionizing radiation will be as widely known as cigarettes and crack are today. Victims of crack and cigarettes chose their fate – wireless radiation exposure will be less kind.

  6. Schwabe says:

    This wireless issue has a stark similarity to scurvy. In more ways than one:

  7. Stop Minnesota Meters says:

    Richard, while I understand the need to have proof, sometimes there is no absolute “proof” when talking about something scientific. That being said, there are around 15,000 studies that show either harm or other biological effect of non-ionizing radiation, which isn’t supposed to happen, because non-thermal radiation is not supposed to have any effect, according to the FCC, FDA etc. You do not have to go on the “subjective” complaints of ES people. You can look at the scientific changes that happen in EEGS instead of the subjective complaint, for example. For me the most “convincing” information scientifically comes from the website If you go onto their site, and read all of the abstracts that show effect, you will get a good idea of the scientific studies that concern scientists in the field and the rest of us who watch this.

    Understand, also, the bias that is created by industry paid scientists when they are the ones doing the studies. As I am sure that you know, these studies paid for by the industry, are often not reliable. This is what is part of the problem. I recently spoke with someone at the EPA, who told me that the reason the EPA was cut from studying non-ionizing radiation, was the military. The military uses RF and does not want to have any backlash from studies that show harm. Also, look at the new information of the use of low level RF in medical technology (like treating liver cancer) on If this low-level non-thermal RF has no effect on the body, then how can it kill the liver cancer cells? Interestingly enough, there are “windows” in which RF works. Also, some specific frequencies are more damaging than others. There are many differences in what RF does to people, including gender differences that have been seen in the studies.

    As an ES person myself, I understand anonymous. I think that from my standpoint, it is not the people like Monique who are the problem. My problem and the frustration comes from people who don’t even want to entertain the thought that something could be harmful with it. Otherwise intelligent, good people who just look away and get glazed over even when you say something as minor as that you need to step away from the WiFi box. Or when you are at dinner at your brother’s house (a doctor that thinks there scientifically can be no problem from non-ionizing radiation) and you get sick from the cell phones and WiFi, and when you say something everyone freezes and the conversation stops and no one will look at you. Or when the Water Board responsible for smart meters, after you have done an hour long presentation with information in it like that the FDA and the FCC do not regulate this area, looks at you and states that these are regulated by the FCC and FDA and therefore safe.

    Or when you read the paper about 5G coming and you think about the planet that is now inside a microwave oven and the increasing damage that will be done. You think for example, about the suffering of the dogs in their metal crates stuck inside next to a smart meter, the suffering of a baby that has a WiFi box on one end of the room, a baby monitor next to her head, and her mom’s cell phone on all night on the table right next to her head. You drive to work looking at all the huge cell towers with the people living in houses right under them. You think about the dolphins that lose their way because they can’t navigate anymore. You think about the birds (that also navigate on electromagnetic fields) that are dying and unable to find their way. You work with people that you can see are affected by this radiation. As an attorney, I sit in courtrooms for hours at a time. You see the Judge’s faces turning red when they have been too close to the router box for too long. They start to hold onto their heads and begin to have short term memory problems. They can no longer find the words they need. Your friends and others you know are out with Melanomas, with Breast Cancer, with Migraines that won’t stop. Your other friends have children who can’t sleep, who are always sick.

    You talk to these people who are telling you how sick they are and suggest looking into turning off their wireless. They look at you as if you are nuts. Then their cell phone rings and they take the call. You see pain and suffering all around you and no one seems to want to wake up. Over and over I talk with someone about this, and they tell me that their doctor says that it is menopause, or they just have the flu, or chronic fatigue, or their husband wants it, or they paid for it already, or any other reason. Many many people do not even want to entertain that wireless might be an issue. I am not saying that there might not be other issues as well. There are many other poisons out there. But why not be open to the possibility that RF is a problem if nothing else is working to heal? People like Monique that even want to look at it are rare, where I live. This holds for organizations as well. I have gone to every environmental group I can think of here. I have gone to the Sierra Club, for example. They say that it is not an issue, and even if it were, they have too many other issues they have to deal with. I go to other groups, like autism groups, and give them literature on the issue. They say “yes, yes,” and smile, and then nothing changes. Of course, every once in a while, you do find someone who helps, someone who listens. My veterinarian. My good friend the pediatrician.

    But they are sadly, few and far between. And the march of the constant wireless gets worse and worse. The power on the microwave that this planet is in keeps getting turned up and sometimes it feels as if no one is noticing or caring except a few. This is what is so frustrating and creates a “rant” as above. I do not know whether it is possible to have the general population “believe” that ES is real and I do not think that if we want to make change that this should be the focus. Those of us who have it know. If only it were psychosomatic, I could actually treat it and get better. I would love if it were psychosomatic. The biggest change (the WHO 2B status) came because people like Anders Ahlbom’s ties to the wireless industry were found out, so he was kicked off of the panel. The more what the wireless industry is doing is exposed for what it is, the more people will understand the dangers of this technology.

    We have to constantly alert the media when there is news, and ask them to report it. Why wasn’t the new information that the Interphone study was compromised because they stated that they did not use information about cordless phones, when actually they did, all over the news? This skews the results to show fewer cancers than it should. What about the information about the Knesset requiring warnings on cell phones? The information about the High Court in India telling 13 mobile phone companies they have to show cause why they are not following the laws regarding radiation levels and placement of towers, etc. Our media are silent on these issues. And the power of the oven is always getting higher.

    • Richard says:

      @SMM – Thanks for the link to powerwatch…Interesting…I was not aware of that one.

      “…think about the planet that is now inside a microwave oven…”

      I wish posters would refrain from statements like this. It only serves to scare people, and that’s just not fair. Every one of us on this site knows that the power density/flux/wattage (whatever units you want to compare) are orders of magnitude more than anything related to SmartMeters.

      I really am sorry for people that claim to be suffering from EHS, but (back to Josh’s point…waaaayyy back) it’s difficult for a scientifically-minded person to embrace the cause when the studies cited as evidence don’t support the claims (see @SJ above). Is scaring people with false claims (e.g., the microwave oven analogy) the best way of growing a support base?

      • Soapbox Jill says:

        @Richard. Right. It’s just not fair to scare people – about asbestos, tobacco smoke, lead in water pipes or paint, x-ray machines in shoe stores, balls of mercury to play with in science labs at school. No, don’t even bring up the possibility that these things might be harmful. Ignore ALL the studies that show harm and effects you don’t believe in. Don’t bother, don’t take precautions, because you wouldn’t want to frighten anyone into being careful with these harmless exposures. Society’s not ready for it. Let them rest in peace.

      • Soapbox Jill says:

        P.S. Richard, in case you have trouble visualizing these invisible emissions, take a look at this cityscape cartoon I created to help people get it:

  8. Stop Minnesota Meters says:

    Dear Richard: How are we not inside a microwave oven? How does this analogy not fit? I read somewhere recently that 96% of the earth is now covered by microwave radiation. This is not just from smart meters, at this point, they are still a small amount of it, but from cell towers, satellites, radar from airports, military applications, city-wide WiFi, internal WiFi, cordless phones, etc. etc. The radiation from cell towers are made so that the cell overlaps with another cell of radiation. This creates a giant blanket of a cell of radiation over the earth. Although the watts may not be the same, (though who is really testing? When testing has been done in certain large population areas, often it violates the already lax “standards” (which I have in quotes because there are really no non-thermal standards at all)), the frequency is the same (2.4 GHz) and the effect is the same over time. For example, if you heat your food on half of the power in a microwave oven, it takes twice as long. I do not see this analogy as a “false claim.” Further, when I used this analogy I was speaking about my own feelings when I read the scientific articles and drive to work seeing the cell phone towers, etc. To me it feels as if we are in a microwave oven, where everytime I look around, there are 4 more towers built, more meters, more WiFi, etc. Even my neighbor’s WiFi is allowed to go into my house. Have you ever measured the radiation coming from an actual microwave oven, by the way? I was in a house the other day (big house, lots of concrete) where we measured the radiation coming from it one floor up. Microwave ovens are supposed to be shielded, but are allowed to leak.

    Also, not sure which study by SJ above you are stating does not support the claims. Have you read the work of Zory Glaser?

    In terms of scaring people, (back to Josh’s comment) I’m not sure that we can get away from it. After all, one of the books in the past, Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” certainly was scary. In fact, the scariness of it motivated many environmental policies and people. (By the way, Arthur Firstenberg’s “Silent Wireless Spring” is a great article to read). The reality is, the amount of radiation that we have right now is extremely scary. According to Olle Johansson at the Karolinska Institute, just at the time of the 3G technology people were being exposed to a “million billion” times the RF background radiation than before this technology. What is happening to the planet right now is extremely scary. It is reasonable to be scared in times like these.

    The question is, though, is why do people not want to listen and at least consider it? I think that part of the reason is that this sort of technology has an addictive quality. It activates areas in the brain (dopamine? I can’t remember….but I’ll try to look it up for you if you want). Also, emfs themselves cause a stress reaction in the body. When people are really stressed out, and yes, I know that there are many reasons to be stressed out other than emfs, but they are also a stressor, people can’t deal with yet another issue. Also, people are pretty easily manipulated by advertising and propaganda. When the media and the governmental agencies say something is safe, people tend to believe this. Anyone who says differently is Chicken Little. When I brought my doctor’s letter saying I was sensitive to WiFi to my work, I got a letter back from the County Environmental Health Specialist, who stated in the letter that he kept current with new information about RF. This was a few months ago. The only problem was, he cited the WHO to say it was safe. He had not even heard of the IARC’s 2B classification.

    I do think, however, that we are not going to get anywhere with the “oh poor me” I am sensitive issue. I think when we want to get something done politically, we should focus on the health of children, and even things like health care costs. Here is an article which has some information on how health worsens when emfs appear. Although the Planetary Association for Clean Energy sounds a little hoky if you look it up it has good credentials. I do think that on a website like this, people should be able to rant and rave a little.

  9. Stop Minnesota Meters says:

    One more thing, Richard. Why is it, that when we provide studies that show harm, that we are simply told that there is not enough proof? Why to we need to prove there is harm. Why don’t you show me, for example, the pre-market testing that was done by an independent organization, on Smart Meters? Or on cell phones? Or even any pre-market testing by the industry? Tell me why it is that all of the research done by the EPA on non-thermal effects of RF have not been published or made into non-thermal standards for the US? Tell me why it is that Congress preempted the state and local governments under the Telecommunications Act for regulating cell towers based on health and environmental issues. Tell me why the EPA was told to end their research and close their section of the EPA on RF just when the cell companies wanted to roll out their towers. Show me the independent research done on health before and after roll outs of cell towers, or of City-wide WiFi.

  10. Richard says:

    “Why is it, that when we provide studies that show harm, that we are simply told that there is not enough proof? ”

    >> Please refer me to a study (or the multitude?) in which harm was demonstrated by RFR at a power density of 10 uW/cm^2 or less (SmartMeter-scale) and I’ll consider it with an open mind.

    Regarding the microwave oven analogy, I was trying to avoid stating the obvious, but Earth has been blanketed in all forms of radiation since it’s formation. So, here we are, basking in the radiation field of the Sun, not to mention all of its cousins out there. Regarding your cooking time, as I understand MW low/high power, the “power” is not being reduced, instead the oven is cycling on/off , scaled to your power setting.

    I don’t like how the TeleAct restricts objection based on possible health effects any more than you do. It simply slams the door on the concerns of people that claim EHS, and I don’t think that’s right.

    Well…That’s enough for now. Catch ya later 🙂

    • admin says:

      A few studies showing adverse biological effects under 10µW/cm²

      1) Campisi, A., Gulino, M., Acquaviva, R., Bellia, P., Raciti, G.,
      Grasso, R., Musumeci, F., Vanella, A., and Triglia, A. 2010. Reactive
      oxygen species levels and DNA fragmentation on astrocytes
      in primary culture after acute exposure to low intensity
      microwave electromagnetic field. Neurosci. Lett. 473(1): 52–55.

      2) Chiang, H., Yao, G.D., Fang, Q.S., Wang, K.Q., Lu, D.Z., and
      Zhou, Y.K. 1989. Health effects of environmental electromagnetic
      fields. J. Bioelectr. 8: 127–131. doi:10.3109/

      3) Guler, G., Tomruk, A., Ozgur, E., and Seyhan, N. 2010. The effect
      of radiofrequency radiation on DNA and lipid damage in nonpregnant
      and pregnant rabbits and their newborns. Gen. Physiol.
      Biophys. 29(1): 59–66. doi:10.4149/gpb_2010_01_59

      4) Hjollund, N.H., Bonde, J.P., and Skotte, J. 1997. Semen analysis of
      personnel operating military radar equipment. Reprod. Toxicol.
      11(6): 897. doi:10.1016/S0890-6238(97)00074-9. PMID:

      5) Lebedeva, N.N., Sulimov, A.V., Sulimova, O.P., Kotrovskaya, T.I.,
      and Gailus, T. 2000. Cellular phone electromagnetic field effects
      on bioelectric activity of human brain. Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng.
      28: 323–337. PMID: 10999398.

      6) Mann, K., Wagner, P., Brunn, G., Hassan, F., Hiemke, C., and
      392 Environ. Rev. Vol. 18, 2010
      Published by NRC Research Press
      Roschke, J. 1998. Effects of pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic
      fields on the neuroendocrine system. Neuroendocrinology,
      67: 139–144. doi:10.1159/000054308.

      6) Panagopoulos, D.J., and Margaritis, L.H. 2010b. The effect of exposure
      duration on the biological activity of mobile telephony
      radiation. Mutat. Res. 699: 17–22.

      7) Pologea-Moraru, R., Kovacs, E., Iliescu, K.R., Calota, V., and Sajin,
      G. 2002. The effects of low level microwaves on the fluidity
      of photoreceptor cell membrane. Bioelectrochemistry, 56(1–2):
      223–225. doi:10.1016/S1567-5394(02)00037-3.

      These are from:
      Many other studies listed there use SAR, often at fractions of the FCC limit in terms of SAR.
      But you might also want to read this:

      Have a good day, Richard. I hope you don’t just stop in here to get a dose before you go off to work.

      • Richard says:

        “I hope you don’t just stop in here to get a dose before you go off to work.”

        >> Not sure I understand this comment, but I am seriously interested in the topic. Thanks for the refs.

    • > I don’t like how the TeleAct restricts objection based on
      > possible health effects any more than you do.

      You certainly have a way with weasel words.

      To be accurate, the Telecom Act of ’96 slams the door on local zoning and every living thing.

      • Richard says:

        “You certainly have a way with weasel words.”

        >> and you’re an ass. I’m not trying to weasel anything, so bite me!

        I’ve tried to be understanding and honest in my critiques, but YOU, Smarter Meters, are an ass, and if you are representative of the group, then I’ve had it, and you can track my IP address to prove it.

        I”M DONE! Yeah, I know I said it in December, but NOW IM DONE!

        As for MW and RF radiation, it IS a small part of solar radiation, (much smaller than UV/VL/IR, but still there) so the FAQ/pamphlet “fact from fiction” from another is bogus, too.

        Get a grip folks.

        You’ve got to be able to take reasonable critiques if you want your cause to get anywhere.

        Good luck with your campaign of fear and misinformation!

        BLAH! 🙁

        • Soapbox Jill says:

          Aw, Richard. Too bad you’re gone for good. Had hoped you would re-consider that do-it-yourself test of putting a router under yr pillow for a while to prove your point. If pulsed rf emissions are indeed harmless, why not sleep with a router for a time and report the zero results? It could be ammo against all the “anecdotal” evidence from others who report symptoms from such exposures.

  11. Stop Minnesota Meters says:

    “Regarding the microwave oven analogy, I was trying to avoid stating the obvious, but Earth has been blanketed in all forms of radiation since it’s formation. So, here we are, basking in the radiation field of the Sun, not to mention all of its cousins out there.”

    See number 8 of this “fact from fiction” for your answer to the sunlight issue–which is regularly trotted out by those defending the wireless industry. Not saying you are, but just that it is a common misperception.

    As to :” I don’t like how the TeleAct restricts objection based on possible health effects any more than you do. It simply slams the door on the concerns of people that claim EHS, and I don’t think that’s right.”

    It’s not just the ES people. The Telecommunications Act is a problem for birds, wildlife, dogs, cats, children and you.

  12. Electra says:

    Good news, to cleanse your palate!

    Dear Friends,

    We made it through one of the most critical junctures in Georgia – to get Senate Bill 459, for an opt out option for “smart” meters, through the Rules Committee so it can at least be voted on! Thank you for your hard work. I’ll be calling tonight until I’ve left messages with all the senators I have not yet talked with – about 20 left to go. It’s not easy, but it’s also not difficult. Knowing that so many will benefit makes it worth all the effort!

    I hope all Georgians will continue to call and/or email every senator you can, and remind them that their constituents will appreciate their “Yes” vote on Senate Bill 459 in this election year, and it will possibly save these Georgia citizens from great harm. Remember, you can grab all the senators’ email addresses at once at http://www.stopsmartmetersGeorgia.Org. Please let me know if you have any difficulty doing that, and I’ll be glad to help.

    Zach, Senator Shafer’s aide (Shafer is the main sponsor of SB 459), said we could call senators between 8 a. m. and 10 a. m. tomorrow (Wednesday), and still make a difference. The voting begins at 10 in the morning, and may go until midnight!

    Thanks, again, to StopSmartMeters.Org. You and your readers are the best!

  13. Pingback: A Primer on the FCC Guidelines for the Smart Meter Age | Stop Smart Meters!

  14. Jay says:

    Has there ever been a double-blind study on anyone claiming to be “electro-sensitive”? Put such a person in a screen room, and randomly turn and off an RF source at or below FCC exposure limit.

    If such a person can tell when the transmitter is operating at a probability greater than random chance, then the phenomenon of electrosensitivity would have some credence.

    Without such a study, in my opinion it is placebo effect and merely a sign claiming “WiFi Hotspot” will induce the symptoms whether or not there is operational WiFi or any other source of radio frequencies in the vicinity.

    • admin says:

      @Jay Many people can understand your desire for a kind of scientific certainty. Designing a good study would be involved. Some sensitivities take a while to show up: a hour or two in a field of a certain strength, or the sensitivity depends on other health factors. Speaking personally for a moment, for 5 years I suffered skips in my heart rhythm—when I was near my wifi unit, and yet also when I was other places in the house that were more distant. The sensation is like having the wind knocked out of you, tho reduced in intensity. When they happen in long runs, it’s disturbing.

      I had no idea there was a relationship; however, I wondered, so I removed the unit. Within a month, I had no more heart arrhythmias. That was 11 months ago. Bingo, I’m free of it. Except when I spend a stretch of time in a moderately intense RF field, which I occasionally do, or when I spend 10-15 minutes next to someone indoors data-streaming on their iphone. Then the skips come back. Then I happened on this study:

      Check out this gold-standard, double-blind, twice-reproduced study: “Microwave Radiation Affects the Heart”

  15. Vic Sick says:

    We need all the help we can get . We are fighting the water co.”smart meters alone ” in Pa. Even the name of a lawyer, who we can pay to help on 4th amendment,health etc. Please dont brush us off, we have spent a lota $ already and are fighting like mad but their is no one else we can find. We know it cant be true but thats the case! They wont tell us who makes the thing or is it ul listed or even made in the USA.All we know is that it conects with a sensus “touchread” 2 wire meter but this thing has 3 wires and thers a place on the “touchread” for the 3rd wire that”MUST” be conected.HELP,HELP HELP,HELP brothers and sisters!

  16. Soapbox Jill says:

    Vic, can’t you file a freedom of information request? This is just off the top of my head. Could you stage a sit-in until they disclose the information? How about calling the Sensus company and asking as if you are just curious about their product line? Good luck.

  17. Soapbox Jill says:

    and Vic, Does anyone have one yet? Or how about asking to “see” one and them writing down the information to identify it? Have you gone to the newspapers about freedom of information? How about the state ACLU?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.