Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 383

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #301

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    No Government research here folks (certainly none that supports the claims being made.)

    First of all, this is a bibliography, a list of papers and other sources that mention the subject in some way. It does not even list the individual findings, let alone describe the methodology used to derive the findings, or such basic information as the strength of the radiation or distance and duration of exposure. There is also a list of all the symptoms mentioned somewhere in all these publications.

    The author states below the list of symptoms:

    "Note: These effects are listed without comment or endorsement since the literature abounds with conflicting reports. In some cases the basis for reporting an “effect” was a single or a non-statistical observation which may have been drawn from a poorly conceived (and poorly executed) experiment."

    And the "Government" part says:

    "The comments upon and criticism of the literature made in this report, and the recommendations and inferences suggested, are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Navy Department or of the Naval Service."

    So if this is your best source you seem to have more regard for its usefulness than even its author does.

    Patrick Brinton

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by arthunter: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  3. TopTop #302
    Scott McKeown's Avatar
    Scott McKeown
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    I'm not necessarily pro-Smart Meter or anti-Smart Meter but I found this report interesting. Maybe it's already been posted in this discussion thread. Apologies if so.

    https://ccst.us/publications/2011/2011smart-final.pdf

    Not all "science" reports or "studies" are created equal. There are high quality science reports and studies and not so high quality science reports and studies. And peer review matters.

    This is a comprehensive report titled, "Health Impacts of Radio Frequency Exposure From Smart Meters" issued by the California Council on Science and Technology. The California Council on Science and Technology is an impressive group with Council and Board members hailing from the California Institute of Technology, University of California, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, NASA Ames Research Center, etc. etc.

    In this age of anti-expertise, I realize that in some people's minds such institutional expertise immediately disqualifies it from being valid. Perhaps the hundreds of people who are involved from such a wide range of respected research institutions are all part of some Deep State conspiracy, or at least so the thinking goes. Bloggers and websites run by individuals with no serious experience at all in the field are, apparently, to be more trusted.

    Here is my view on this issue: as in just about everything, dosage matters.

    Scott
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  5. TopTop #303
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown: View Post
    I'm not necessarily pro-Smart Meter or anti-Smart Meter but I found this report interesting. Maybe it's already been posted in this discussion thread. Apologies if so.

    https://ccst.us/publications/2011/2011smart-final.pdf ...
    Here's the summary from the report:

    KEY REPORT FINDINGS
    1. Wireless smart meters, when installed and properly maintained, result in much smaller levels of radio frequency (RF) exposure than many existing common household electronic devices, particularly cell phones and microwave ovens.
    2. The current FCC standard provides an adequate factor of safety against known thermally induced health impacts of existing common household electronic devices and smart meters.
    3. To date, scientific studies have not identified or confirmed negative health effects from potential non-thermal impacts of RF emissions such as those produced by existing common household electronic devices and smart meters.
    4. Not enough is currently known about potential non-thermal impacts of radio frequency emissions to identify or recommend additional standards for such impacts
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  7. TopTop #304
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Are we looking at the same page? When I click on the links in this article government files are opened with pages and pages of medical conclusions about the bioeffects of emf fields, especially the last link????
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton: View Post
    No Government research here folks (certainly none that supports the claims being made.)...
    Last edited by Barry; 05-24-2017 at 09:57 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. TopTop #305
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Those of us who are concerned have lots of company. Governments or organizations that ban or warn against wifi https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/?page_id=128
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  9. TopTop #306
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    More of the same. Just look at this. Are all of these countries just stupid? I would love to know that this technology is safe, but the warnings are just overwhelming
    https://www.parentsforsafetechnology...ng-action.html
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  10. Gratitude expressed by:

  11. TopTop #307
    barfly's Avatar
    barfly
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    I noticed that this cellphonetaskforce list makes reference to a supposed filing by ARRL's Bioeffects Committee to the FCC. Since I'm a long time ARRL member with access to all of their web info, I wanted to see not the pull-quote but the entire filing to read in context. I couldn't find it in ARRL records or on the FCC web site.

    The ARRL is a highly respected organization. The referenced quote implies that the ARRL supports their position, which is absolutely false. For example, the same referenced Bioeffects Committee, now known as the ARRL RF Safety Committee, issued this statement regarding the "Bioinitiative Report":

    A relatively small group of scientists whose research and publications have been widely discredited by the RF safety scientific community has formed and is going on the offensive. They have published the “Bioinitiative Report,” which features only the discredited research and ignores the bulk of the research that has been performed on electromagnetic bioeffects. This publication is often quoted by those who wish to place excessive limitation on RF transmissions. This group has now gotten the attention of the new administration in Washington, DC. The IEEE Committee on Man and Radiation, COMAR, sent a response to the President’s Cancer Panel, that their summary of the perceived dangers of RF exposure “does not provide a balanced and objective analysis of the currently available scientific and medical evidence describing the association of RF exposure and tumor development.”

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by arthunter: View Post
    Those of us who are concerned have lots of company. Governments or organizations that ban or warn against wifi https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/?page_id=128
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  12. Gratitude expressed by:

  13. TopTop #308

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by arthunter: View Post
    Are we looking at the same page? When I click on the links in this article government files are opened with pages and pages of medical conclusions about the bioeffects of emf fields, especially the last link????
    I clicked on the first link in the paragraph headed "What Government Research Has Found". After seeing the quality of their first linked source (one might assume they put their best material at the top, right?) I did not want to waste time looking at any more links.

    If you expect people to be impressed by your evidence, you might be well advised to link directly to the material you think is strongest, rather than to a page that itself is at best confusing and in some places downright nonsensical and which links to the kind of material that I critiqued.

    You say now that the last link is the best; do you expect readers who are not already believers is your cause (since believers are not going to bother anyway, and you are engaged in a debate with non-believers) to wade through a bunch of junk to get to the jewels?

    I will often click on such links because I am curious and willing to look at real evidence. When my time is wasted I lose sympathy with the cause.

    Please link directly to actual peer reviewed well conducted double-blind studies that include their methodology, exposure levels, frequency and strength of radiation and all the details needed to form a valid judgement on the subject. Anything short of this is wasting our collective time and attention. And please do not respond with a post with 50 links. Hit us with your very best two or three that meet these criteria.

    Patrick Brinton
    Last edited by Barry; 05-24-2017 at 09:58 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  15. TopTop #309
    Sieglinde's Avatar
    Sieglinde
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Here is the real danger. I have not had any wifi issues after having my Smartmeter installed.
    https://www.smartdatacollective.com/...fi-not-people/
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  16. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  17. TopTop #310
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Sorry, but I do not agree with your opinions at all. The first link is indeed research conducted by the Naval Medical Research Institute into the Biological Phenomena and Clinical Manifestations attributed to Microwave and Radio Frequency Exposure. What they've done is quite amazing. They have listed biological responses to emf and catalogued over 2000 references which relate to these bioeffects. And you think that there's no relevance to this discussion? Really? I find the very list of bioeffects to be important, especially given the source of this report.
    Of course, there will be a disclaimer as there always is when creating a reference only publication. The other two links are equally important and I'm sorry that you missed them.

    I'm not instructing others on this thread about how to do their research. What to include and what to leave out. I want to see it all. And I am not here to "impress" anyone. This is not a contest

    This is a matter of public safety which many countries have acknowledged and acted upon.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton: View Post
    I clicked on the first link in the paragraph headed "What Government Research Has Found". After seeing the quality of their first linked source (one might assume they put their best material at the top, right?) I did not want to waste time looking at any more links. ...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  18. TopTop #311
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    I also could not find the origin of this quote but, because I am not a member of this organization, I do not have access to archives. What I did find are many references to the quote, including a press release for a lawsuit in Oregon about wifi in schools. One would think that this organization would have responded to this by now if indeed the quote is fabricated.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by barfly: View Post
    I noticed that this cellphonetaskforce list makes reference to a supposed filing by ARRL's Bioeffects Committee to the FCC. Since I'm a long time ARRL member with access to all of their web info, I wanted to see not the pull-quote but the entire filing to read in context. I couldn't find it in ARRL records or on the FCC web site....
    Last edited by Barry; 05-25-2017 at 01:16 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. TopTop #312
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by arthunter: View Post
    Sorry, but I do not agree with your opinions at all. The first link is indeed research conducted by the Naval Medical Research Institute into the Biological Phenomena and Clinical Manifestations attributed to Microwave and Radio Frequency Exposure. . ...
    well, to be accurate, the first link is to the advocacy site 'defendershield.com'. They in turn link to the NMRI report. The disclaimer Patrick refers to is on page 7. I don't think your interpretation of the report is correct, plus your casual dismissal of disclaimers kind of voids the point of having one, doesn't it??
    In his forward, the author calls this document a bibliography, not a research paper. It's a collection of other papers, with (again, as Patrick says) no value judgements implied about their quality. The NMRI paper itself noticably does not make any inferences; all it does is collect a list of claimed physical effects and papers that discuss them.

    If anything, this rebuts one of the pro-EMF-effect position: there is indeed a sizable body of research, and yet there's no concensus about the harm EMF can do. It's difficult to believe most scientists are ignoring a huge number of papers, since the NMRI itself has collected them. It's more likely that no strong case has yet been made despite the issue getting attention. It's instructive to consider climate change, which shows the reverse conditions: there's a lot of research done and in this case the consensus is that indeed it does exist. The only thing in common between the two is the accusation that (some) corporations and politicians deny the problems exist. The difference is that the scientific community at large accepts one as proven, and the other as not.
    Last edited by Barry; 05-25-2017 at 01:17 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  20. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  21. TopTop #313
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Thank you for your opinion.
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    well, to be accurate, ....
    Last edited by Barry; 05-25-2017 at 01:17 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  22. TopTop #314
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by arthunter: View Post
    Thank you for your opinion.
    yeah, I thought the logic was quite compelling
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  23. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  24. TopTop #315
    Sasu's Avatar
    Sasu
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    There are many comments in rebuttal to the CCST report. Notable is Dr. Raymond Neutra (retired Chief of the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control after 27 years at the California Department of Public Health, and head of the EMF program at CDPH)

    Dr. Neutra concludes his letter, "This is not the way I would like to see public policy pursued. Unfortunately you are not alone in this pattern of language use, hidden assumptions and making the uncertain seem certain so a to provide cover for policy."


    * * * * *
    Scientists Challenge CCST Conclusions
    The California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) Smart Meter Report, Health Impacts of Radio Frequency From Smart Meters was released in April, 2011. This report was produced in response to California Assembly members Jared Huffman (Marin) and Bill Monning (Santa Cruz) inquiry into the safety of smart meter wireless technology and the possible inadequacy of the federal radio frequency radiation (RF) safety standards.

    International science and medical experts from Israel, Sweden, Canada, Greece and the US criticize the CCST findings. Although previous headlines varied about the results of the study, these experts agree, the study fails to protect public health.
    Elihu D Richter MD, MPH from Israel is “a medical epidemiologist who has assessed source-exposure-effect relationships for many chemical and physical agents over the past 40 years.” Dr. Richter writes, “ It is fair to say that we are no longer talking about mere precaution of uncertain risk, but about prevention of highly probable and known risks. Based on the accumulating evidence, it is now fairly certain that there will be widespread adverse public health impacts.”
    Dr. David Carpenter, public health physician and former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany, New York writes, “This document is not an accurate description of the state of the science on the issue of radiofrequency fields, and is full of inaccuracies.” He calls the report “faulty” and states, “The evidence for adverse effects of radiofrequency radiation is currently strong and grows stronger with each new study.”
    Olle Johansson, PhD, Swedish Professor from the Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute writes, “Many smart meters are close to beds, kitchens, playrooms, and similar locations. These wireless systems are never off, and the exposure is not voluntary. The smart meters are being forced on citizens everywhere. Based on this, the inauguration of smart meters with grudging and involuntary exposure of millions to billions of human beings to pulsed microwave radiation should immediately be prohibited…”
    Lukas H. Margaritis, Professor of Cell Biology and Electron Microscopy and Adamantia F. Fragopoulou, Biologist and Researcher from the University of Athens, Greece, comment, “The California Council of Science and Technology has released a report on WIRELESS SMART METERS, in which any relation with health hazards has been bypassed. It is however ‘common secret’ between the researchers in the field of electromagnetic biology that such a statement has absolutely no scientific validity…”
    Raymond Richard Neutra MD, DrPH, (CA EMF program) concludes his comments by stating, “This is not the way I would like to see public policy pursued. Unfortunately you are not alone in this pattern of language use, hidden assumptions and making the uncertain seem certain so a to provide cover for policy.”
    California Department of Public Health commented on the CCST study stating, “CDPH suggests further review of the literature on non-thermal effects, which is complicated and controversial, but does not support a claim of no non-thermal health effects from radio frequency electromagnetic fields.”
    Dr. Carl Maret

    The CCST has now posted all comments online https://www.ccst.us/projects/smart2/



    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown: View Post

    https://ccst.us/publications/2011/2011smart-final.pdf

    Not all "science" reports or "studies" are created equal. There are high quality science reports and studies and not so high quality science reports and studies. And peer review matters.

    This is a comprehensive report titled, "Health Impacts of Radio Frequency Exposure From Smart Meters" issued by the California Council on Science and Technology. The California Council on Science and Technology is an impressive group with Council and Board members hailing from the California Institute of Technology, University of California, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, NASA Ames Research Center, etc. etc.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  25. Gratitude expressed by:

  26. TopTop #316
    barfly's Avatar
    barfly
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    I didn't say or intend to imply that the quote was fabricated. I'm finding these things are often taken out of context or misconstrued, then propagated wildly. I saw the references all looked identical, none with additional info or any link to the original. I hoped to see what the original document referred to. Since I couldn't find it, I thought ARRL's statement regarding Bioinitiative was instructive as to their findings.

    The FCC issues a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM), followed by a period of public comment. This quote is likely one sentence taken from an NPRM comment submitted by ARRL. My best guess, given the date of the comment as 1994, wasn't there an FCC report & order issued in 1996 revising the exposure limits?

    ARRL certainly is concerned with RF safety and part of that R&O was to update licensing requirements to include information pertaining to current FCC exposure limits and how to insure compliance.

    And no, I don't think ARRL would necessarily respond about some web sites posting this quote from '94. Who would they respond to?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by arthunter: View Post
    I also could not find the origin of this quote but, because I am not a member of this organization, I do not have access to archives. What I did find are many references to the quote, including a press release for a lawsuit in Oregon about wifi in schools. One would think that this organization would have responded to this by now if indeed the quote is fabricated.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  27. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  28. TopTop #317
    barfly's Avatar
    barfly
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Advocacy site? That seems pretty generous. It looks to me like a web store intended to frighten people into spending hard earned money on expensive, questionable products. The first thing I see is a "faux leather" cell phone case for $79.99.

    "...revolutionary cell phone radiation shield uniquely structured to provide total protection from cell phone radiation without affecting signal quality."

    Will someone please explain to me how this case prevents the phone from radiating, yet the phone still works?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    the first link is to the advocacy site 'defendershield.com'
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  29. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  30. TopTop #318
    Milgram Experiment's Avatar
    Milgram Experiment
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    I apologize for not getting back to you earlier as I do help people in the real world. I'm on the front line meeting those that are suffering and helping them mitigate their exposure. Once the exposure is gone so is the list of symptoms. I do this day in and day out. Standards set by the FCC is an absolute joke and a disgrace to the community. People thinking they are looking out for them are naive.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sieglinde: View Post
    Have you tracked how often and how powerful the signal is? I suspect that the Smart Meter is not transmitting all the time.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  31. TopTop #319
    Milgram Experiment's Avatar
    Milgram Experiment
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    The problem with your theory is that the heart doesn't react every time the smart meter fires off a signal. I have spent thousands of hours testing with RF and electric fields. The galvanic skin response seems to react for longer periods of time every time. For seconds and not quick bursts. The environment was controlled and monitored with RF and electric field strength measuring devices. Another video coming soon addressing concerns raised. We appreciate all the skeptics as it helps strengthen the case.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sieglinde: View Post
    There are a number of fine books on how to design experiments. Doing one in an uncontrolled environment is probably first on the list of don'ts. There needs to be more than one subject that complains of EMF problems and there needs to be a placebo affect (subject told that there is a Smartmeter next to his head and it is actually deactivated) You will need the specs of a Smartmeter to simulate what they actually do. This was just a story not a real experiment. You would need persons with medical and engineering expertise. I would recommend that it not be done in a home which has wiring, outside EMF etc. I suspect my wifi router is giving wifi out to my neighbors. Your environment would have to be better controlled. Bad experiment design which is actually designed to get the results that you want is very BAD SCIENCE.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  32. TopTop #320
    Milgram Experiment's Avatar
    Milgram Experiment
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    The American system relies on sick people. The doctors don't want to know what the problem is,. remember they "practice" medicine. They keep a blind eye to the cause as there is no money involved. How many doctors go to the home? You could be sleeping next to a big bottle of poison and they wouldn't care. They rely on your ill health....that's their job. There's lots of money in "treatment". I'll let the reader figure out how many jobs would be lost if people weren't sick. Big pharma, health insurance, doctors, clinics/hospitals, and the media.

    Anyone can try and sprout seeds next to their WiFi router and figure out there is a problem. You don't need a paper or lab to watch the results, but they will scream that you do. Either use some common sense or listen to the doubters steering you into misery. No one really cares. I don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror.
    Last edited by Barry; 05-25-2017 at 01:22 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  33. TopTop #321
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Thanking you for your opinion does not mean that I agree with it... There's a reason that this research was done. Perhaps, as stated, it was to enable other researchers to access the huge body of literature which exists for this subject, both pro and con. In my eyes it was never meant to prove the theories, only to list the bioeffects under discussion and the resources available. This is important info, IMO.

    Once again the baby is thrown out with the bath water. In the rush to discredit this information, the other references to government research have been ignored. Also ignored are the references to legal actions taken in foreign countries. I find this interesting. Obviously, other nations are not as willing to subscribe to technocracy .


    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    yeah, I thought the logic was quite compelling
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  34. TopTop #322
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Milgram Experiment: View Post
    ... The doctors don't want to know what the problem is,. remember they "practice" medicine. They keep a blind eye to the cause as there is no money involved. How many doctors go to the home? You could be sleeping next to a big bottle of poison and they wouldn't care.....
    your doctors must suck. I know a lot of doctors, some of them really well. I've never met one like you describe, though I have had some doctors describe a few colleagues that way (in particular, supervisors in prison healthcare). But hey, go ahead and base your argument on blanket condemnation of a whole class of people.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  35. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  36. TopTop #323
    Trail_Goddess's Avatar
    Trail_Goddess
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Good grief! I am so sick of this baseless conspiracy theory tripe. There is plenty wrong with our system of healthcare(primary due to access), yet our average lifespan has almost doubled since the beginning of the 20th century! If doctors and medicine are trying to harm us they obviously suck at it.
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Milgram Experiment: View Post
    The American system relies on sick people. The doctors don't want to know what the problem is,. remember they "practice" medicine. They keep a blind eye to the cause as there is no money involved. ...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  37. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  38. TopTop #324
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Milgram Experiment: View Post
    ... Anyone can try and sprout seeds next to their WiFi router and figure out there is a problem. You don't need a paper or lab to watch the results, but they will scream that you do. ...


    That sounds like a nice easy experiment.
    Anybody care to try it, along with sprouting seeds in a similar environment away from your router and report back?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  39. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  40. TopTop #325
    Trail_Goddess's Avatar
    Trail_Goddess
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Sorry, but in the absence of proper scientific method the only thing this would confirm is that we will all just see what we already believe. Here's the Snopes on the results of this experiment.
    https://www.snopes.com/cress-wifi-experiment/

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post
    That sounds like a nice easy experiment.
    Anybody care to try it, along with sprouting seeds in a similar environment away from your router and report back?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  41. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  42. TopTop #326
    barfly's Avatar
    barfly
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    I was about to post the same Snopes article link, but you beat me to it! For those that won't bother with it or reading to the end, here's the conclusion:

    "It is true that in May 2013 a small school science project was done by five Danish schoolgirls, its findings cyclically reported and shared on social media for years thereafter. Although anti-technology sites continue to present the claim as novel and credible, seasoned researchers almost immediately identified significant flaws in the methodology. At least one attempt was made to replicate the results of the teenagers’ research, but no information emerged between May 2013 and April 2017 to suggest it was ever determined that wifi definitively stunts the growth of cress, or any other plant."

    I don't agree that no one should bother. There's no point in seeing this from someone like Paul Harding (Milgram Experiment), who already has both a reputation for producing misleading, false info, as well as having a significant financial interest in the result.

    However, this experiment is so simple that it can easily be done. Just be sure to take pictures at intervals starting from day one, include some that clearly show the room, position of plant trays & router, any details of light source, heater vents, and so on that might influence the results. Then keep a notebook and document everything. Use a pen, never erase. If you write something in error, strike a line through it. Water with a measuring cup. A thermometer next to each set of plants would be nice.

    Any experiment is subject to errors. Being a good scientist does not require having perfect equipment, an unlimited budget, 100% controlled environment. It *does* require thinking critically about the possible sources of error, quantifying as best you can, documenting everything and incorporating error analysis into your results.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Trail_Goddess: View Post
    Sorry, but in the absence of proper scientific method the only thing this would confirm is that we will all just see what we already believe. Here's the Snopes on the results of this experiment.
    https://www.snopes.com/cress-wifi-experiment/
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  43. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  44. TopTop #327
    Trail_Goddess's Avatar
    Trail_Goddess
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Absolutely give it a shot if you like! My point about scientific method is that without it we see the results as supporting what we believe because that's how we roll. Science is the best way humans have come up with to keep from fooling ourselves, and we are very prone to fooling ourselves! If what you believe is not true do you want to know? Then science is how to do that.
    Last edited by Barry; 05-26-2017 at 11:08 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  45. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  46. TopTop #328
    arthunter's Avatar
    arthunter
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  47. Gratitude expressed by:

  48. TopTop #329
    Sasu's Avatar
    Sasu
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    This is a ppt from the California Dept of Public Health from 2009- before smart meters were deployed. Note the science known- EMF linked to leukemia and brain tumors, children more vulnerable...
    https://ehib.org/cehtp/cehtp.org/emf...H_10_26_09.pdf

    A Range of Reasons for Precaution
    Raymond Richard Neutra MD DrPH

    (2)Wrong Question for a Health Officer to Answer

    • Are all scientists virtually certain that there is some health risk from transmission lines, cell phones, cordless phones and cell base stations?

    (3)Right Questions

    “How certain must we be of how much ill-health from cell phones, cordless phones and base stations before we would opt for cheap or expensive protection? “
    What precautionary options are available?

    Last edited by Barry; 05-27-2017 at 08:48 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  49. Gratitude expressed by:

  50. TopTop #330
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Sasu: View Post
    This is a ppt from the California Dept of Public Health from 2009- before smart meters were deployed. Note the science known- EMF linked to leukemia and brain tumors, children more vulnerable......

    (3)Right Questions

    “How certain must we be of how much ill-health from cell phones, cordless phones and base stations before we would opt for cheap or expensive protection? “
    What precautionary options are available?
    I agree with the identification of the 'right questions', but I'm confused why you think this supports your usual position. I read it exactly opposite. They express some concern, but not much. They do want further research, but don't seem to find anything that can be considered definitive. For example, here are many of the slides:

    Breast Cancer Early Evidence
    Epidemiologic studies largely negative „ None designed to test specific hypothesis „ Animal studies inconsistent „ German and US results inconsistent „ Several laboratories report effects in MCF-7 cells „ Effect seen only in certain type of cells „ ? relevance

    Breast Cancer „ Well-designed residential and occupational studies with comprehensive exposure assessment found no indications of increased risk „ The weight of the evidence available today suggests that power frequency magnetic field exposure is not a risk factor for female breast cancer development

    IARC and WHO Evaluation Extremely Low Frequencies (ELF) 2002, 2007

    ELF magnetic fields classified as Group 2B “Possibly Carcinogenic” based on „ limited human data (epidemiologic studies) of childhood leukaemia. „ inadequate animal data. „ Other exposures and outcomes considered “inadequate to classify”

    ==== And the summary:

    Interpretations for policy development
    Not proven – no need for action „ Low/no cost PP based on childhood leukemia (Kheifets et al. 2005, WHO 2007) „ Enough evidence for 0.2 µT limit according to Kundi et al. (2006) „ Extrapolation from tox leads to 10 µT Limit (Valberg 2006) „ Other outcomes (adult leukemia, brain, breast cancer, ALS, miscarriage) need to be considered thus much larger expense justifiable under PP (Henshaw et al. 2007, Bioinitiative 2008)
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  51. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

Similar Threads

  1. PG&E to escalate Smart Meter deployment in Sebastopol?
    By Sasu in forum General Community
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-05-2013, 11:26 AM
  2. Sebastopol Smart Meter update: chasing off installers
    By Sasu in forum General Community
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-08-2013, 11:22 AM
  3. IJ article about Inverness resisting Smart Meter - Wireless Meter
    By daynurse in forum All Marin County Posts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-23-2011, 05:17 PM
  4. Smart Meter issue revived in Sebastopol
    By Sabrina in forum General Community
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-14-2011, 12:30 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-06-2010, 07:08 PM

Bookmarks