Is Dirty Electricity a serious Health Threat?

reply to post by beckybecky


Not that the redneck really needs someone to come to his aid, but i am an employed licensed master electrician and everything he has stated is indeed fact. And no I don't work for the power company, and I like himself, probably have more years of school and trade experience than you have been alive.... Do your homework before insinuating someone is a shill.

And then I found this article:

"EMF exposures destroy health and well-being, claims panel of top international scientists"

(NaturalNews) Nearly 8 million people worldwide die from cancer on an annual basis. Cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death, killing almost 17 million people in 2011; both of these statistics are spiraling out of control. Now three top scientists, Dr. Panagopoulos of the University of Athens , Associate Prof. Johansson of the Karolinska Institute, and Dr. Carlo of the Science and Public Policy Institute, are sounding the alarm bell. Leaders in their respective fields, Panagopoulos, Johansson, and Carlo, claim electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures significantly below international safety levels exposures are destroying the public's health and well-being. Recent study findings This latest study concluded the present standard of measuring EMFs, Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), to be totally inappropriate. SAR measures the heating effect of EMF based technologies like microwave ovens, cell phones, cordless phones, Wi-Fi and the like. But countless studies have brought to light adverse biological effects at radiation levels significantly below levels where a thermal effect is detected.

See whole article here:
www.naturalnews.com...

I have been in the electrical engineering field for over 12 years, and currently work for a company that does testing and consulting for utilities. I have been aware of the smart grid, smart meters for years. I have read and participated in research on them and their safety. Most of my work has been testing stuff before it enters the market, and now advising utilities.

The first video posted is nothing more then an example of a person not knowing how the utilities maintain the service area. It has been sprayed with poison, probably by the utility during an inspection to keep the vines from getting in the meter panel. But it is definitely poison. The fruit tree could be a victim of anything, but it is not from a smart meter. Multiple studies from reputable independent companies have proven the output of the smart meters is negligible, and definitely distance oriented.

I have heard from so many utilities stories of people calling up and complaining about the smart meter causing headaches, and that they "started when that meter was installed" and even tell a date they think it was. 90% of the time the meters have been installed for a long period of time and the date the customer claims they were installed was probably the date they read about something on the internet.

Having said that, as proven in south Carolina, they are not a secure means of transferring or maintaining data. Anybody with the software(usually free), a opto coupler, and the manufacturers log in information(I have found some with the default user name and password still in) can access them if they know what they are doing.

Another thing about the smart meters that is more real, and less fantasy is the cost that it has required to install the smart meters will be retrieved by utilities by increased rates. Additionally some are talking of going to time of use billing, which smart meters will now allow. Meaning you would pay different rates at different times of day.

Smart meters have their problems, but being harmful is bunk.

Originally posted by tnhiker
I have been in the electrical engineering field for over 12 years, and currently work for a company that does testing and consulting for utilities. I have been aware of the smart grid, smart meters for years. I have read and participated in research on them and their safety. Most of my work has been testing stuff before it enters the market, and now advising utilities.

The first video posted is nothing more then an example of a person not knowing how the utilities maintain the service area. It has been sprayed with poison, probably by the utility during an inspection to keep the vines from getting in the meter panel. But it is definitely poison. The fruit tree could be a victim of anything, but it is not from a smart meter. Multiple studies from reputable independent companies have proven the output of the smart meters is negligible, and definitely distance oriented.

I have heard from so many utilities stories of people calling up and complaining about the smart meter causing headaches, and that they "started when that meter was installed" and even tell a date they think it was. 90% of the time the meters have been installed for a long period of time and the date the customer claims they were installed was probably the date they read about something on the internet.

Having said that, as proven in south Carolina, they are not a secure means of transferring or maintaining data. Anybody with the software(usually free), a opto coupler, and the manufacturers log in information(I have found some with the default user name and password still in) can access them if they know what they are doing.

Another thing about the smart meters that is more real, and less fantasy is the cost that it has required to install the smart meters will be retrieved by utilities by increased rates. Additionally some are talking of going to time of use billing, which smart meters will now allow. Meaning you would pay different rates at different times of day.

Smart meters have their problems, but being harmful is bunk.

if they are harmless then how do microwave ovens work?

when are you going to put your head in one and tell us the result?


so how much do you get paid for serving the power companies spreading their propaganda and saving them money by firing meter readers.is it a bonus,or do they send you a free pen and calendar.

do you get with eat the director on his yacht or bang his wife and daughter?

reply to post by beckybecky


Yes microwaves are dangerous but, as stated earlier, it's a matter of intensity and proximity that determines the degree of danger. A 'smart' meter is no more hazardous than a wifi router or a bluetooth device and decidedly less hazardous than a cell phone because of the proximity factor as the cellphone is very very close to your body most of the time and almost always within reach (in your pocket or on your belt). Even then, the evidence of harmful effects of cell phones is merely anecdotal with laboratory tests varying between negative and inconclusive.

You're right about propaganda but it's coming from the sort of people who worry about their digital TV spying on them, not the energy companies. You need to study up on how the spot energy market operates to find the answer as to why these meters are attractive to energy providers. Hint - it's to do with efficiency not radiation or spying.

I have a very simple but effective wideband EMR meter I constructed years ago for testing microwave oven radiation leaks and the strongest reading I ever observed on it was from my cell phone when I'd left it on the workbench next to the phone (by chance) and the phone did its periodic negotiation with the cell tower. Anything over a foot from the phone the reading is a virtual zero (inverse square law).

Anyone still truly concerned about smart meter emissions should just inspect their switchboard/meter box to see if it's a galvanised steel box (which I'll wager all are or at least all fairly modern ones). The steel back on the box will prevent any radiation (safe or harmful) coming through the wall into the premises. If the meter box does not have a steel back then you could ease your worries by fitting a small thin sheet of earthed steel in the wall behind the box as a very effective EMR shield.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by beckybecky

 

Yes microwaves are dangerous but, as stated earlier, it's a matter of intensity and proximity that determines the degree of danger. A 'smart' meter is no more hazardous than a wifi router or a bluetooth device and decidedly less hazardous than a cell phone because of the proximity factor as the cellphone is very very close to your body most of the time and almost always within reach (in your pocket or on your belt). Even then, the evidence of harmful effects of cell phones is merely anecdotal with laboratory tests varying between negative and inconclusive.

You're right about propaganda but it's coming from the sort of people who worry about their digital TV spying on them, not the energy companies. You need to study up on how the spot energy market operates to find the answer as to why these meters are attractive to energy providers. Hint - it's to do with efficiency not radiation or spying.

I have a very simple but effective wideband EMR meter I constructed years ago for testing microwave oven radiation leaks and the strongest reading I ever observed on it was from my cell phone when I'd left it on the workbench next to the phone (by chance) and the phone did its periodic negotiation with the cell tower. Anything over a foot from the phone the reading is a virtual zero (inverse square law).

Anyone still truly concerned about smart meter emissions should just inspect their switchboard/meter box to see if it's a galvanised steel box (which I'll wager all are or at least all fairly modern ones). The steel back on the box will prevent any radiation (safe or harmful) coming through the wall into the premises. If the meter box does not have a steel back then you could ease your worries by fitting a small thin sheet of earthed steel in the wall behind the box as a very effective EMR shield.

edit on 24/8/2013 by Pilgrum because: (no reason given)

i fear you are being very disingenous and i can prove it..

the meter is clearly registering wi-fi radiation at some distance yet you lie about steel boxes..it's killing the shrub.

what steel box? are you blind? its plastic.you seem to be very dim or lying again.why?

wi-fi means a van passes by and reads the wi-fi data set from a particular house without a meter reader.

so why would it be enclosed in a steel box as then the wi-fi signal would be nearly zero.

see i have caught out you again.


you are clearly lying when you say this:-

Anything over a foot from the phone the reading is a virtual zero (inverse square law)".

how does the phone talk to the cell phone tower if the reading is zero at 1 foot?

TELL US?

see i have caught you out again.

reply to post by beckybecky


Please note that I used 'virtual zero' IE not enough energy to register on my meter but obviously sufficient to be received by a nearby cell tower. What I was trying to point out is that that the energy of that phone signal drops off dramatically with distance and, therefore, the claimed harmful effects of exposure to that signal fall off at the same rate (signal strength is inversely proportional to the distance from the source). When the phone is in your pocket you're periodically exposed to EMR stronger than any leak I ever observed from a (slightly) faulty microwave oven door seal yet there's still no firm proof of it being enough to cause harm. Unless you're within inches of the 'smart' meter most of the time it can't pose even as great a risk as your cell phone which is in your pocket, hand or against your ear nearly all the time apart from when it's being charged.

Perhaps some info on Faraday Cages will help in understanding how simple it can be to keep EMR (harmful or not) out of areas you want to be 'clean'. My home has a steel in the roof and a foil type insulation in the walls which (unintentionally) screens out EMR making cellphones and wifi etc very unreliable (even unusable) inside the house.

Ever tried to use a cell phone or GPS unit inside a building with steel reinforcement?

Hence my suggestion of a sheet of earthed metal between the meter box and the occupants to screen out EMR (harmful and benign) in a specific direction while still permitting contact with the meter reader from outside.

The dead plant around the meter box in the vid has obviously been sprayed with a weedkiller like glyphosphate to keep the area around the box clear. The claims of deadly radiation are just uninformed hype aimed at an uninformed audience.

ETA: I've never seen a plastic meter box in this country (thinking fire survivability being the main reason) but there are much older types which are basically timber lined with fireproof AC sheet that would be transparent to radio signals. A full steel box with a steel door would require an external antenna for wifi comms to work, or an RF transparent replacement door.

reply to post by Pilgrum

Why continue to feed someone that cannot digest it? Happens so much here. Ignore people that obviously have no engineering background, and just like to argue. They destroy good threads with ridiculous rhetoric.

Microwave ovens output around 800-1200 WATTS somewhere near 2.4GHz, the resonant frequency of water; wireless routers @ 2.4GHz output maybe 1 WATT at most. So if you could 'nuke' your hot dog in 30 seconds in the microwave, it would take at least 800 times as long... more likely a few weeks actually because the heat it generated due to the 'radio waves' would radiate out to the air and thus keep it from getting too hot... to 'nuke' it with your router. And by then, it would have spoiled and would make you sick simply because of the bacteria that grew on it.

Here is a simple solution in deciding whether or not these electric waves are harmful.
We know that those who worked around asbestos had a much higher chance of developing
lung cancer and other lung diseases; Also coal workers used to be at a much higher risk
of developing lung diseases.

Now the question is, and what does research show, when it comes to electricians and high power
line workers? Do those who work around live electrical lines and/or other electric devices have
a higher rate of cancer or other diseases blamed on electric fields? IF the answer is no then I
would surmise that the dirty electric threat might be over exaggerated.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by beckybecky

 

Please note that I used 'virtual zero' IE not enough energy to register on my meter but obviously sufficient to be received by a nearby cell tower. What I was trying to point out is that that the energy of that phone signal drops off dramatically with distance and, therefore, the claimed harmful effects of exposure to that signal fall off at the same rate (signal strength is inversely proportional to the distance from the source). When the phone is in your pocket you're periodically exposed to EMR stronger than any leak I ever observed from a (slightly) faulty microwave oven door seal yet there's still no firm proof of it being enough to cause harm. Unless you're within inches of the 'smart' meter most of the time it can't pose even as great a risk as your cell phone which is in your pocket, hand or against your ear nearly all the time apart from when it's being charged.

Perhaps some info on Faraday Cages will help in understanding how simple it can be to keep EMR (harmful or not) out of areas you want to be 'clean'. My home has a steel in the roof and a foil type insulation in the walls which (unintentionally) screens out EMR making cellphones and wifi etc very unreliable (even unusable) inside the house.

Ever tried to use a cell phone or GPS unit inside a building with steel reinforcement?

Hence my suggestion of a sheet of earthed metal between the meter box and the occupants to screen out EMR (harmful and benign) in a specific direction while still permitting contact with the meter reader from outside.

The dead plant around the meter box in the vid has obviously been sprayed with a weedkiller like glyphosphate to keep the area around the box clear. The claims of deadly radiation are just uninformed hype aimed at an uninformed audience.

ETA: I've never seen a plastic meter box in this country (thinking fire survivability being the main reason) but there are much older types which are basically timber lined with fireproof AC sheet that would be transparent to radio signals. A full steel box with a steel door would require an external antenna for wifi comms to work, or an RF transparent replacement door.

edit on 5/9/2013 by Pilgrum because: (no reason given)

now now now.

you are back pedaling after being caught out.

and who are you to call people uniformed when yourself are ignorant or pretending to be ignorant or working for your masters.

where is your proof that weed killer was used?

how is it obvious?

how about all the thousands of videos showing radiation killing plants?




you need a faraday CAGE.

you know what a faraday cage is?

a sheet of metal is useless for gigahertz frequencies for shielding.

to prove to yourself the guy is lying put your phone on a sheet of metal and it will still work.

tut.tut.

you assertion about sheets of metal keeping radiation out is laughable.

maybe you should remove your microwave oven door and wear a tin foil hat.

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by Pilgrum

 

Why continue to feed someone that cannot digest it? Happens so much here. Ignore people that obviously have no engineering background, and just like to argue. They destroy good threads with ridiculous rhetoric.

of course you don't want to discuss it.you want people to be ignorant so that your corporate masters can harm us and make money while laughing at the little people.

it must make you feel oh so important to be one step above the little people and to be serving such masters.just like in the movies like the lickspittles.

what is they give you? a calendar and a pen or some cheap praise to make you feel so important?