EMP April 8, 2014Posted by healthyself in Cell phone safety.
An electromagnetic pulse, or EMP for short, is a short burst of electromagnetic energy, sometimes called a “transient electromagnetic disturbance.” An EMP event can occur naturally, such as from a powerful lightning strike.
But what makes EMPs so potentially dangerous to life on Earth is the unnatural occurrence of an EMP event, like that which is commonly associated with the detonation of a nuclear device.
There are some common misconceptions about so-called “EMP weapons,” and the development of them by various great powers, including the United States. But there are no misunderstandings about the devastating effects that EMP bursts would have on modern technology. As the Heritage Foundation has noted in congressional testimony, EMP blasts spread out over the skies of America would essentially send the country back to the 19th century technologically, because EMP events would “decimate America’s electrical and technological infrastructure.”
Yet, few lawmakers and policymakers seem to take the threat seriously, experts have complained. Worse, an underreported story that was covered by Natural News and a few other outlets indicates that terrorists may be targeting our electric grid because, even if it is not destroyed by an EMP weapon, there are most definitely weak points that some analysts say could produce the same results as an airborne nuclear explosion [http://www.npr.org].
Targeting the power grid
In April 2013, in what authorities describe as a “military-style assault,” attackers cut phone lines leading to a major power substation near San Jose, Calif. Then — about 25 minutes later — snipers began firing on it, knocking out 17 gigantic transformers that supplied power to Silicon Valley.
“To avoid a blackout, electric-grid officials rerouted power around the site and asked power plants in Silicon Valley to produce more electricity. But it took utility workers 27 days to make repairs and bring the substation back to life,” The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported in February.
Since then, the story was picked up by TheBlaze, which produced a special report regarding the vulnerability of the American power grid.
The report began, noting that “there are three key networks” that deliver power throughout the United States: the Western, Eastern and Texas grids. They are interconnected by more than 160,000 electric power transmission lines and 55,000 electric substations.
“Perhaps one of the worst parts about it,” says Peter Pry, a congressional homeland security advisor, “is that you really only need to take out one of the grids to cause a national catastrophy.”
Former congressional advisor Elizabeth Kreft noted that where power is actually created — at the power plants — are transformers that increase electric voltage “so that it can actually travel a long distance,” she says in the video.
“And then there’s a transformer that steps down that voltage so it can actually be sent to your house,” she said.
Pry said that Extra High Voltage (EHV) transformers connecting the grids and sub-systems “are actually the foundation of our modern society.” He added they are akin to what aqueducts and roads were to the Roman Empire. “Our society can’t operate without” them, he said.
‘Months to build’
That said, the report noted, EHV transformers — as important as they are to the function of American society — are one of the most unprotected of national infrastructure assets.
Additionally, Pry said, EHVs “are one of the most technologically difficult things to manufacture.” Each EHV plays a “unique role” in the grid, because each one is “custom-made” for the respective grids they power. “They are hand-built,” he said.
He said that, while the U.S. used to build EHVs, “we exported the technology for the electric grid to the world.” Now, he admits, the U.S. must import them, which is another vulnerability of the system, because they each take 18 months to build.
There are only two countries that build them for export, and both are U.S. allies — South Korea and Germany.
In response to the San Jose attack, FERC — the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — conducted a classified study in 2013, which, as WSJ reported, revealed alarming results.
See the remainder of TheBlaze’s video report here.
Wireless Water Meters…..a threat? November 14, 2013Posted by healthyself in Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic Radiation, EMF Exposure, EMF's.
Tags: electromagnetic frequencies, emf's, wireless, wireless meters
Are wireless meters a threat? Stillwater resident concerns prompt Nov. 14 review of water meter options
November 13, 2013 at 3:11 pm
Staring at the yellow sheet of paper in his hand, Jim Cashman could hardly believe what he saw.
“The water service to this property will be shut off for failure to provide access to the water meter,” the paper read.
The notice came after the Stillwater resident and his wife objected to the mandatory installation of a wireless water meter in their home. If they didn’t comply, they had been warned, the water to their home would be turned off.
But Cashman didn’t want a wireless water meter.
“That didn’t sit well with us for a variety of reasons, the foremost being health and privacy issues,” Jim Cashman said. “And to have these crammed down our throats is wrong.”
The Cashmans aren’t the only ones being required to make the switch. The Stillwater Board of Water Commissioners has mandated that all water meters in its jurisdiction be replaced with a wireless model, which crews can read simply by driving past properties. The $1.4 million project is being funded by bonds (at record-low costs) with no additional charge to customers. About 90 percent of the meters in Stillwater have already been replaced, with the remainder of installations planned to be
completed this month.
The city’s water board, which consists of three commissioners appointed by the city council, says it’s simply trying to be a good steward of financial resources.
“These meters we’re replacing are old,” Commissioner Steve Speedling said. “They’re not catching some of the flow.”
That means some customers pay less than they owe. By updating the system, Speedling said, the city can charge customers more fairly and receive full payment for water used. The new meters will also comply with updated federal standards for lead content, which go into effect in January 2014.
In addition, Water Department Manager of Operations Robert Benson said the department will save an estimated 72 work days per year with the wireless meters. Instead of eating up approximately 20 days (160 man-hours) per quarter reading meters, the wireless system will allow an employee to spend about two days per quarter taking readings. For a staff of six people, that’s significant.
Cashman said he understands the perceived advantages, but it bothered him that he didn’t have a choice in the matter. He attended two water board meetings and asked for more time to study the meters without fear of his water being shut off. Although it threatened to turn off the water, the water board has not done so, instead granting him two extensions.
When Cashman began researching, what he found appalled him.
“There are a lot of issues regarding these wireless water meters,” he said. “And they are not as safe as some people portray them to be. … Dozens of cities around the country … have given their people opt-out provisions.”
Health and privacy concerns
In recent years, wireless “smart” meters for water or electricity have been the subject of controversy across the country and around the world.
Concern has centered around privacy concerns over what type of information smart meters transfer, as well as worries that the meters could cause health problems because they emit low-frequency radiation. The meters work by emitting a digital pulse several times a minute that can be detected by a digital reader in a water department vehicle as it drives by.
St. Paul Regional Water Service began a replacement project similar to Stillwater’s in 2010 and finished earlier this year. In response to citizen concerns, the water service approved a provision allowing residents to select an alternate meter. A $12 charge applied to customers who chose a non-radio device that requires someone to physically read the meter.
Leo Cashman, of St. Paul, (no relation to Jim Cashman) helped lead the charge against mandatory smart meters in St. Paul and is joining the debate in Stillwater. He’s the founder of Safe Technology Minnesota, a nonprofit dedicated to educating the public “about the health and environmental dangers of EMF (Electromagnetic Field) pollution.” He has a bachelor’s degree in physics and feels passionately about the subject of excessive radiation. He even avoids cordless phones and microwaves.
But he starts explaining his concerns with a caveat:
“Nobody is against electromagnetic radiation,” he said. “Your eyes are open, and you’re seeing light. That’s electromagnetic radiation. … It’s kind of like sound. That’s another form of energy that travels around. … Nobody’s against that either, although you don’t want to have a loud sound that blows your eardrums out.”
With cell phones, microwaves, smart meters and more, Leo Cashman says people are exposed to too much radiation today. He claims there’s a growing body of scientific evidence that suggests the levels of radiation to which humans are exposed have harmful effects.
Like many who share his position, one study Leo Cashman cites is a “BioInitiative 2012” report with contributions from scientists around the world, including scientists from Harvard Medical School, Columbia University, the University of Athens and Lund University Hospital in Sweden.
The BioInitiative study calls for stricter government limits and more study of potential health effects of low-frequency radiation. It concludes that “the business-as-usual deployment of new wireless technologies is likely to be risky and harder to change if society does not make some educated decisions about limits soon.”
Leo Cashman said many other studies have also suggested health risks. He said the FCC’s regulations are inadequate to protect against the risks.
“It’s not nearly as protective as what you have in many European countries or elsewhere on earth,” he said.
He says the FDA, which he believes has a responsibility to regulate radiation, has been “negligent in setting any standards.”
Leo Cashman alleges that much public policy is influenced by industry-funded studies and interests, but he says it’s irresponsible to ignore what he sees as strong evidence of health risks.
“When a … unit of local government carefully makes a decision, they ought to be informed by the science and make a decision that protects public health,” Leo Cashman said. “What they’re doing is they’re putting their convenience ahead of our safety.”
Jim Cashman agreed.
“I don’t think there was enough time and research that went into this decision to force these upon us,” Jim Cashman said.
The water board’s perspective
Members of Stillwater’s Board of Water Commissioners say that the decision-making process started about two years ago and that commissioners did their due-diligence.
As for privacy concerns, the board says this model of wireless meter isn’t truly a “smart” meter. It only broadcasts the number of gallons of water used for billing purposes — it doesn’t broadcast information about usage patterns or times. It does collect usage data, which is stored internally for 90 days and can only be retrieved with physical access to the meter. Commissioner Speedling said the department would only access that information as a diagnostic tool if a customer reported a problem.
Commissioners say they have also considered health concerns. The commission hired a consulting firm,TKDA, to research the safety of the wireless meters.
“We had heard there (were) some groups out there that had concerns about using this type of technology, but everything that was coming back to us was stating this was safe,” Speedling said.
“There’s confusion by people because they’re confused by the information that’s available on the Internet and in the newspapers,” Commissioner George Vania said.
Vania — who has a master’s in engineering and recently retired from a 40-year career in the water and wastewater industry — said the board took a science-based approach all along.
Before the commission made its initial decision, Vania said, it reviewed information from the FCC and FDA, as well as Health Canada. None of those organizations found evidence to support the idea that cell phone or similar low-level radiation causes harm to humans.
He also noted that the radiation emitted by one of the water meters is far below that of cell phones and other common devices. In fact, it emits radiation for a total time of less than one minute per day.
After hearing from Cashman and another resident who expressed concern at a water board meeting, Vania did more research, including looking at the BioInitiative 2012 study.
Although he found it to be one of the sources most commonly cited by opponents of smart meters, Vania called the BioInitiative study a “poorly prepared technical document.” He pointed to critiques, such as an article from sciencebasedmedicine.org by Kenneth Foster, a professor of bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania. In his article, Foster calls the BioInitiative report “an egregiously slanted review of health and biological effects of electromagnetic fields.”
Vania said many independent agencies have concluded that there isn’t sufficient evidence to support the claim that wireless smart meters cause health problems.
Some local governments in California have banned wireless smart meters, but the California Council on Science and Technology concluded in 2011 that there wasn’t evidence of known health impacts. In December last year the Public Utility Commission of Texas reached a similar conclusion. The World Health Organization has not been able to rule out the possibility that radiation from cell phones and other devices causes cancer, but it has not found evidence to conclude that exposure to such low frequency electromagnetic fields is harmful to human health.
Vania admitted he can’t rule out the possibility that in 10 years science might demonstrate a health risk associated with wireless water meters, but he doesn’t believe any studies have done so to date. He strongly believes the water board is doing its best to protect the community using a sicence-based approach.
“Look, I got the meter in my house,” he said.
But Leo Cashman disagrees with Vania’s conclusions.
“I think it’s completely wrong to say there’s no science indicating harm,” he said. “Anyone who says that hasn’t looked very hard or has only looked at industry science.”
Regardless of what others conclude, Jim Cashman hopes he’ll get to make up his mind for himself and choose whether or not to allow installation of a wireless meter.
“It is a violation of basic human rights to be forced into having a pulse digital radiation device put into the inside of our home,” he said. “It is only right, at the very least, to give people a choice in the matter.”
For now, Cashman isn’t in danger of having his water shut off. The water board has been gathering information from other cities about options they provide customers, and the board is meeting Thursday, Nov. 14, to discuss how to proceed.
“Right now everything’s on the table,” Speedling said. “We have to make a decision as a board on what we’re going to do to maintain what’s best for the community.”
That includes consideration of the cost for making exceptions to the rule.
Leo Cashman plans to testify at the Nov. 14 meeting, and both sides agree it’s a good opportunity for members of the public to ask questions or make their opinions heard.
The meeting is at 8:30 a.m., Nov. 14, at the water department, 204 Third Street N., Stillwater.
The water board has more information at ci.stillwater.mn.us. Scroll down and click on “Board of Water Commission’s Water Meter Replacement Project.”
Leo Cashman’s organization has more information at safetechmn.org.
Electromagnetic Spectrum March 27, 2013Posted by healthyself in Cell phone safety.
add a comment
City Warns of Cell Phone Link to Cancer December 5, 2012Posted by healthyself in Brain, Cell phone safety, headaches, Health Risks.
Tags: Brain Tumor, headaches, hip, left ear, left hand, pressed
1 comment so far
The city of Pembroke Pines wants its residents to know that cell phones could be dangerous and linked to cancer. A newly-passed resolution was inspired by a resident who believes his brain tumor was caused by his mobile device.
“A lot of scientific data has to be done with it and the ordinance is kind of generic but it makes people aware,” said Pines mayor Frank Ortis.
Pines resident Jimmy Gonzalez had tumors removed in his brain above his left ear, his left hand, and near his hip. All places where he said his phone was pressed for long periods of time.
“I kept getting headaches,” Gonzalez said. “One day I realized I hold my cell phone with the same hand, up against this ear and when I was done, I would put it in to these pockets.”
November 28, 2012
The Most Important Health Discovery Ever? July 20, 2012Posted by healthyself in Cell phone safety.
Tags: Earthing, electricity, grounding, health, toxicity
1 comment so far
Static Electricity, Cell Phones and Gas Fumes March 21, 2012Posted by healthyself in Cell phone safety, Cell Phones, Electricity, Fire, Static, Women.
Tags: cell phones, Fire, Static Electricity, Women
1 comment so far
Here are some reasons why we don’t allow cell phones in operating areas, propylene oxide handling and storage area, propane, gas and diesel refueling areas.
The Shell Oil Company recently issued a warning after three incidents in which mobile phones (cell phones) ignited fumes during fueling operations
In the first case, the phone was placed on the car’s trunk lid during fueling; it rang and the ensuing fire destroyed the car and the gasoline pump.
In the second, an individual suffered severe burns to their face when fumes ignited as they answered a call while refueling their car!
And in the third, an individual suffered burns to the thigh and groin as fumes ignited when the phone, which was in their pocket, rang while they were fueling their car.
You should know that: Mobile Phones can ignite fuel or fumes
Mobile phones that light up when switched on or when they ring release enough energy to provide a spark for ignition
Mobile phones should not be used in filling stations, or when fueling lawn mowers, boat, etc.
Mobile phones should not be used, or should be turned off, around other materials that generate flammable or explosive fumes or dust, (I.e., solvents, chemicals, gases, grain dust, etc…)
TO sum it up, here are the Four Rules for Safe Refueling:
1) Turn off engine
2) Don’t smoke
3) Don’t use your cell phone – leave it inside the vehicle or turn it off
4) Don’t re-enter your vehicle during fueling.
Bob Renkes of Petroleum Equipment Institute is working on a campaign to try and make people aware of fires as a result of ‘static electricity’ at gas pumps. His company has researched 150 cases of these fires.
His results were very surprising:
1) Out of 150 cases, almost all of them were women.
2) Almost all cases involved the person getting back in their vehicle while the nozzle was still pumping gas. When finished, they went back to pull the nozzle out and the fire started, as a result of static.
3) Most had on rubber-soled shoes.
4) Most men never get back in their vehicle until completely finished. This is why they are seldom involved in these types of fires.
5) Don’t ever use cell phones when pumping gas
6) It is the vapors that come out of the gas that cause the fire, when connected with static charges.
7) There were 29 fires where the vehicle was re-entered and the nozzle was touched during refueling from a variety of makes and models. Some resulted in extensive damage to the vehicle, to the station, and to the customer.
8) Seventeen fires occurred before, during or immediately after the gas cap was removed and before fueling began.
Mr. Renkes stresses to NEVER get back into your vehicle while filling it with gas.
If you absolutely HAVE to get in your vehicle while the gas is pumping, make sure you get out, close the door TOUCHING THE METAL, before you ever pull the nozzle out. This way the static from your body will be discharged before you ever remove the nozzle.
As I mentioned earlier, The Petroleum Equipment Institute, along with several other companies now, are really trying to make the public aware of this danger.
I ask you to please send this information to ALL your family and friends, especially those who have kids in the car with them while pumping gas. If this were to happen to them, they may not be able to get the children out in time.
Radiation Network November 30, 2011Posted by healthyself in Cell phone safety.
add a comment
It appears that some people are reacting to Fukushima. You might want to check these sites.
Find where the antennas and towers are near your home or office November 22, 2011Posted by healthyself in Antennas, Cell phone safety, Cell phone towers, Towers.
add a comment
Cell Phones Do Cause Brain Tumors October 28, 2011Posted by healthyself in airplane mode, Auditory Nerve, Bluetooth, Brain, Brain Cancer, Cancer, Cell phone safety, Children, Children's health, Energy, Glioma, Heavy Use, non-ionizing radiation, Parotid Gland, Sperm Counts, Text, Tumors.
Tags: Bluetooth, brain tumors, cell phones, Glioma, Heavy Use of Cell Phones, non-ionixzing radiation, sperm counts, Texting
Cell Phones Do Cause Brain Tumors
Magda Havas, PhD, Cell Phones Do Cause Brain Tumors
Trent University, September 15, 2011
“About nine out of 10 US households now have at least one cell phone — and that doesn’t include other wireless devices, such as cordless phones, iPads, baby monitors and computers.”
“Result: The average adult (and child) is flooded with nonionizing radiation, a form of energy that — for the first time — has been officially linked to cancer. In May, a panel of the World Health Organization (WHO) listed cell phones as a class 2b carcinogen, which means that it’s “possible” that cell phones, like some industrial chemicals, increase the risk for cancer.”
“This conclusion has been disputed by many scientists. But careful analysis of the best studies to date indicate that people who log the most cell-phone minutes are more likely to develop tumors on the same side of the head that they hold the cell phone, compared with those who use cell phones less often.”
“The largest study of cell-phone use, known as INTERPHONE, was conducted in 13 countries over a 10-year period. The study, published in International Journal of Epidemiology, found that people who used cell phones for at least 1,640 hours over the 10-year period — that comes to about 30 minutes a day — had a 40% higher risk of developing a glioma, a deadly type of brain tumor.”
“Disturbing: The development of a brain tumor to the point that it can be detected often takes 20 to 30 years. The fact that these tumors are showing up after 10 years of exposure is disturbing because it is much faster than expected.”
“Previous studies have linked frequent or prolonged cell-phone use to an increase in parotid (salivary gland) and auditory nerve tumors.”
“The actual risk probably is higher than the studies indicate. The INTERPHONE study defined “heavy use” as using a cell phone for about 30 minutes a day. That’s a fraction of the time that many people currently spend on their cell phones.”
“Also, the study looked only at adults, even though young people are frequent users of cell phones and the ones who face the highest cancer risks from decades of radiation exposure.”
“In addition, the study “diluted” the data by identifying people as regular cell-phone users who may have used their phones only once a week for at least six months. These light users were obviously exposed to far less radiation than heavy users. Including them in the study caused the cancer percentages to appear artificially low. For example, we would not expect someone who smoked one cigarette a week for at least six months to develop lung cancer.”
“Skeptics of cell-phone dangers argue that nonionizing radiation is too weak to heat tissues or break chemical bonds, factors that are known to increase cancer risks. But recent studies indicate damage to DNA in rat brains exposed to cell-phone radiation, and this type of damage can lead to cancer.”
Ways to stay safe…
“The fine print in cell-phone manuals usually advises users to hold the phone at least 7/8 of an inch away from the ear. Farther is better. Use speakerphone mode.”
“Wait for good reception. Cell phones emit much higher levels of radiation when the antenna is sending out signals to search for a tower or satellite. These signals can travel hundreds of miles — and the poorer the reception, the greater the radiation emitted by your cell phone.”
“Use a hollow-tube headset. This is the safest type of headset because the last few inches, those closest to the ear, consist of a hollow tube. This hollow tube transmits sound like a stethoscope. Wired headsets need to be kept away from the body because the continuous wire that runs from the phone to the earpiece will expose you to some unnecessary radiation. Hollow-tube headsets can be purchased at http://www.Mercola.com or http://www.WaveShield.com/products.”;
“Use “airplane mode.” Even when you’re not talking on a cell phone, the phone is sending out signals every few minutes to search for the nearest tower. Turn off the phone when you’re not using it. Or switch it to airplane mode so that it can’t send or receive signals, but you still can use the phone to listen to music, watch videos and check your calendar.”
“Keep the phone on your desk when working. When the phone is switched on, don’t keep it in your pocket or attached to your belt. This is particularly important for men. Preliminary research indicates that men who keep their phones close to their bodies (often in holsters or pockets) have lower sperm counts and poorer sperm quality than those without this exposure. We do not know the effects on egg cells because they are more difficult to harvest.”
“Caution: The worst way to use a Bluetooth wireless headset is to place it on your ear with the cell phone in your pocket. This way, your head and lower body are both being irradiated. A better way to use a Bluetooth is to keep the cell phone on a table several feet away from all body parts and to periodically move the earpiece from one ear to the other to minimize one-side radiation exposure.”
“Text instead of talk. There’s a burst of radiation when you send or receive a text message, but the intensity and duration of the radiation are lower than when you talk. Texting is a better alternative to talking on your cell phone, but keep the phone as far away from your body as possible. Normal clothing, including leather, will not reduce your exposure.”
“Don’t use your phone in a car, train or bus. Using a cell phone inside a metal vehicle can increase levels of radiation due to reflection and the fact that your cell-phone signal has to be higher to exit the vehicle. The best practice is to keep the phone off or in airplane mode and to check it periodically for messages. Then return messages by text or use a landline phone later.”