Normal blood pressure is coeerdnisd to be 120/80. Yours falls in the healthy range of normal (just a hair low from the average). This should be good for the insurance companies.Your pulse rate of 92 is at the high end of average for a resting pulse rate (for reference a resting pulse rate should be 60-100 BPM). However there are many factors that can cause your heart rate to be slightly elevated such as activity before you sat down, or even just the stress of having a medical examination. Coupled with your good blood pressure the insurance companies should put you in a preferred rate unless you have other medical history or family risk factors you didn’t mention (though each insurance company can differ).

You probably didn’t look at any of the studies or link because they go farther back then 2009 plus there are so many of them it would take quite a bit to read them all. I’m surprised as you seem to always point out any discrepancies.

Why post anything from quackery? They are the quacks for relying on drugs to cure them from wireless induced sickness. I hear drug commercials trying to relieve people from smart meter ailments. Anyway, here is a recent well written article about health effects from smart meters
http://wnd.com/2012/12/health-hazards-linked-to-utility-meters/

“Here is a link to recent (2009-2012) studies showing that we are on the right path.”

And here is a link with references showing that “we” may not be on the right path:

http://www. [ quack watch ] .org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/ems.html

Had to edit the link since this site would not let me post it directly, as provided 🙁 BTW, my post is just a reference, not any sort of accusation or implication of “quackery”…

“…your friends at scepticnorth…”

There you go, assuming and misinterpreting…again.

UGH.

This video makes your friends at scepticnorth look like complete young fools that have no understanding on the subject of frequencies and their affects on us. The title is named “Resonance-Beings of Frequency”. Enjoy!

http://vimeo.com/m/54189727

Here is a link to recent (2009-2012) studies showing that we are on the right path. SSM’s #1 troll has prodded my research skills. Maybe you have seen these studies already? It wouldn’t hurt to save them, you never know when they may disappear.
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp

“…just because SSM!’s #1 troll is curious about my profession”

Yeah, it was rhetorical…I figured that you couldn’t be a teacher, given your comment.

As for the “troll” comment…I am not trying to raise anyone’s hackles; I’m just trying to promote some awareness of the what does NOT constitute science, and what should be viewed with skepticism, and why. Why? So people can make truly informed decisions, instead of running in fear with misinformation found online. Studies with n=2 participants; studies with enormous standard deviations; and “studies” conducted by visiting professors in the humanities with obvious bias SHOULD be viewed critically instead of promoted as the latest evidence of “injurious and inappropriate technology”. UGH.

Science can help your cause. Stories will not.

Richard, I hesitate to share personal details online just because SSM!’s #1 troll is curious about my profession.

With that said, I have chosen to leave a number of teaching positions because of technology upgrades that were affecting my health and ability to teach. It was very obvious to me that other teachers were having problems too as there was a spike in migraines and other health problems accompanying these upgrades. Where transmitters (phones and routers) were installed, students who sat closest to the sources of radiation were having more difficulty learning, sitting still and following rules.

It absolutely breaks my heart to know that millions of children are being set up for a lifetime of EHS for the sake of “technology immersion.” To be clear, I am no luddite. Technology and media have their place in schools. That place is a computer lab with wired computers set up to keep EMF exposure as low as possible. Wifi or DECT phones in every classroom that are used a fraction of the time, yet cause constant exposure to teachers and students are a recipe for disaster.

To sidestep the whole health debate, because I know where you stand (firmly superglued to the fence), the main problem I see is that so many people now get their internet access via microwave/wifi that they do not even realize that there are alternatives that accomplish the exact same goal. It should go without saying that smart grid proponents exhibit the same failure of imagination when it comes to power conservation and grid management. We have the wireless industry to thank for perpetuating the myth that wired networks are too expensive to build or maintain.

The number one responsibility of a teacher is to provide a safe, nurturing environment for their students. For a shop teacher, that means requiring safety goggles, dust control, and proper instruction about using power tools. For an art teacher, that means making sure materials with VOCs are used as carefully as possible. For a chemistry teacher, that means using chemicals with caution and imparting a respect for the potentially dangerous substances. For nearly every teacher nowadays, it would be prudent if they understood not only how to use technology in a classroom, but how that technology measurably changes their classroom and how that can affect their students’ ability to learn. I don’t doubt that most teachers sincerely believe they are helping their students prepare for the future, but the good ones know that screen time does not foster creativity, open-mindedness or social skills.

Lastly, I think a key issue here that of language. You can refer to people as “anti-EMF” all you want, but I think if you were to ask, most of us would consider ourselves to be precautionary, pro-health, pro-life, pro-truth, pro-wired, pro-nature, etc. You’re free to think and say that people like Mr. Doyon have an “agenda” even if it all it does is magnify your own.