Watsonville, CA mom Diane Dutton has had enough. After reading the recent Santa Cruz County Public Health Department report that states that the “evidence is accumulating on the results of exposure to RF at non-thermal levels” and then getting a notice from her utility that she would have to pay a fee to not have a device that emits (what PG&E admits is) up to 190,000 bursts of radiation per day- radiation that the World Health Organization now considers a Class 2B carcinogen – she felt it just isn’t right.
“Something just doesn’t add up” she says. “We should not have to pay a fee to protect our health. There is enough science that says this is dangerous- I don’t want my family exposed to it.” So she set out to find others who are similarly alarmed about the smart meter situation and the extortionate opt out fees. The response so far has been very positive.
She says she set up FightTheFees.Org so that people don’t feel so alone when defying their utility. “There are thousands- millions of people opposed to the so-called smart grid- together we’re stronger than any utility company.”
Diane encourages people to defend their analogs, and submit photos of themselves and their families holding a protest sign next to their meters to add to her website. No names or addresses are needed- just your town and a photo under 500kb- you can send to fightsmartmeterfees@gmail.com
That photo is a classic. Notice that the meter shown only has 4 dials. That is a classic meter and should be preserved and registered as a historical meter. There should be laws to protect our heritage meters. These trusty tried and true analog meters have served us for over 40 years, through sag and surge, thick and thin, rain and shine, Wellington deployment attacks and outages to boot.
We need to set up a historical meter registry, and preserve the devices that powered our houses, raised our children, powered our businesses all without compromise, complaint, ill RF radiation. All analog meters (even the one like I still have that has 5 dials that was installed on my house 30 years ago) have performed accurately, timely, faithful to duty, tirelessly, and economically.
Preserve part of our heritage, these analog meters built California to what it is today.
Screw PG&E and their pinche SmartMeters, which are cheaply made, expensive for the ratepayers to buy, dangerous, dirty, toxic, unreliable, inaccurate at times and are generally pieces of DUNG !
Let’s start a museum. But let’s not put the antique meters in the museum because we want to keep using them. No, let’s put the utility tyrants in the museum where they belong.
“radiation that the World Health Organization now considers a Class 2B carcinogen”
Again…some clarification is warranted…The IARC has classified “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields” as a Class 2B agent, which indicates that such fields are (in their opinion) *possibly carcinogenic*.
It is incorrect to twist their classification and state that these fields are “a Class 2B carcinogen”. A “carcinogen” is something that has been shown to cause or promote cancer, in contrast to something that might possibly cause or promote cancer.
>> The IARC has been very careful in defining these terms, and equal care should be exercised in the use of their classification.
The preamble to the IARC monographs, and the monographs themselves, should be required reading for those interested in the understanding the true significance of the various classifications.
“…as a Class 2B agent”
should read “Group 2B” not Class 2B (please excuse the typo).
Good point, Richard. It’s important to remember that it doesn’t really matter if a particular agent is causing widespread sickness and suffering; it’s the terminology associated with its official classification that’s important.
These crazy bastards just have their priorities all mixed up, but I’m sure if you bait them often enough here in the comments section they’ll straighten out eventually.
First, that was rather smarmy.
Second, I have never denied the sickness and suffering of people claiming to be hypersensitive to EMFs.
Finally, definitions are important in science and society, and to claim that the radiation of SmartMeters is “a carcinogen” is just plain wrong.
i just got a letter in the mail last week from my power company that told me that they were going to (at some point in the next month) swap out my analog meter to a digital one, I have done reading on the digital meters and I don’t want it on my house! I know that there is nothing i can do about the situation, but I don’t like the fact that the digital gives off radiation! They have yet to switch it out so we will see if the power company gets to it or not!
electrician….There is plenty you can do. This site has great ideas for resisting. I suggest you look at the helpful resources here if you don’t want to accept it. good luck
To clarify: as it relates to IARC studied agents, “2B” is a specific synonym for “possible.”
It is perfectly acceptable to call RFR an “IARC class 2B carcinogen,” just as wikipedia does. In a situation/forum where these classifications are novel, it MAY be POSSIBLY helpful to be redundant.
This clarifies nothing.
Well I think it does. A Class 2B carcinogen is defined as a possible carcinogen. Therefore, when you say “class 2B” you are saying “possible.” From what I understand, though, for the IARC, that the thing tested often comes in at a 2B. They are a very conservative organization. TWhen the exact mechanism for cancer causation is known, then the rating will go up to 2A.
Then when the exact mechanism for cancer causation is known, the rating will go up to 2A.
Then, as you interpret the IARC definitions, anything in their “Group 4” would also be a carcinogen, although “probably not”. Correct?
Would you agree with the previous statement?
If you agree with that, then where do we stop? — Is every substance “a carcinogen” to some degree?
The rampant mis-use of the IARC’s terminology needs to stop.
Here is what places a substance/emission in Group 4: “evidence suggesting lack of carcinogenicity in experimental animals, consistently and strongly supported by a broad range of other relevant data, may be classified in this group.” Hmmm, wonder why radiofrequency radiation was NOT placed in group 4 if there is no evidence of harm.
Caprolactam is the only “IARC Group 4 carcinogen”
Someone PLEASE start a lawsuit and organization to sue the schools for putting wireless routers in EVERY CLASSROOM OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS !!
Can’t they spend the extra $50 for wires instead? Someone made a bundle on that contract! I smell kickbacks.
And elementary school kids are not allowed to bring in wireless devices anyway, so is it all for the teachers use?
Here we are not understanding how harmful the radiation is, and we are BLASTING young kids with it?
PLEASE!!!!
Jim, teachers and esp. school administrators drank the koolaid. That is the only way to explain the mass brain-death on the issue of irradiating school kids with untested devices and levels of pulsed radiofrequency.
You are right, the wireless industry is so much money oozing out it has metastitized into every segment of our culture and society.
THE SLIMEBALLS are now advertizing cell phone games for toddlers to play so their parents can have a time without being bothered by the kids. This is a 5-page glossy interview of parents with young kids playing on the parents’ smartphones in the latest at&t magazine.
A little computer game time is okay, but I mean just a little, because kids need real life activity more. BUT TO PUT COMPUTER GAMES ON CELL PHONES is to wrap them in poison.
That IS the problem: computers applications for learning and communicating are not instinsically bad. BUT THE POISONED WRAPPER of cellular radiofrequency radiation delivery is dangerous. People can’t distinguish the wrapper from the product underneath. That’s why they get angry and defensive if you speak against wifi or cellular phones due to radiation. THEY NEED TO separate the activity, like sharing photos, from the POISONED WRAPPER.
There is a very important lawsuit right now in Portland, Oregon against the Portland Public schools for WiFi in the schools. This is a landmark lawsuit for all of us. You can read about it on http://www.magdahavas.com and also http://www.wirelesswatchblog.org.
It’s amusing how certain individuals remain so hung up on specific details, yet they continue to make ambiguous, double-negative statements that have no clear point.
I am getting my $75 back. I have been using my solar clothes drier to reduce my electric bill to off set the $10 monthly fee. I will eventually make back the $75, ridiculous, origination fee.
Do everything you can to easily use less power. We should all reduce our electric use to conserve and also reduce the PGE profits. 50% of electric power comes from burning coal, that you never see, in another location anyway. Reduce your use; that will bug them.
Visit my solar clothes drier on YouTube. Search “Travels with Vin” on YouTube. Look for My efficient, simple, low cost, easy to instal and easy to use, “Solar Dryer.”
Available at your local Hardware Store