———————————————————————–
A MUST READ – JAN. 18TH, 2012
FIRST REPORT FROM A COUNTY HEALTH DEPT IN THE NATION, EXPRESSING GRAVE CONCERNS OVER HEALTH COMPLAINTS, LEADS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ASK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO TAKE ACTION.
Letter to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors by an administrative officer of the Santa Cruz County Health Dept., in support of a smart meter moratorium due to health complaints. Brief summary at http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=6959.
SEE ATTACHMENT B AT ABOVE LINK, PAGES 9-18 ARE VITAL TO READ
Excerpt from Santa Cruz County Public Health Dept., page 11 of 20 :
“Evidence-based Health Risks of EMFs
There is no scientific literature on the health risks of SmartMeters in particular as they are a new technology. However, there is a large body of research on the health risks of EMFs. Much of the data is concentrated on cell phone usage and as SmartMeters occupy the same energy spectrum as cell phones and depending on conditions, can exceed the whole body radiation exposure of cell phones phones (see Attachment B1, Figure 4). In terms of health risks, the causal factor under study is RF radiation whether it be from cell phones,
Wi-Fi routers, cordless phones, or SmartMeters. Therefore all available, peer-reviewed, scientific research data can be extrapolated to apply to SmartMeters, taking into consideration the magnitude and the intensity of the exposure.“
——————
page 13:
“In summary, there is no scientific data to determine if there is a safe RF exposure level regarding its non-thermal effects. The question for governmental agencies is that given the uncertainty of safety, the evidence of existing and potential harm, should we err on the side of safety and take the precautionary avoidance measures? The two unique features of SmartMeter exposure are: 1) universal exposure thus far because of mandatory installation ensuring that virtually every household is exposed; 2) involuntary exposure whether one has a SmartMeter on their home or not due to the already ubiquitous saturation of installation in Santa Cruz County. Governmental agencies for protecting public health and safety should be much more vigilant towards involuntary environmental exposures because governmental agencies are the only defense against such involuntary exposure. Examples of actions that the public might take to limit exposure to electromagnetic radiation can be found in Attachment B2.”
(Santa Cruz, CA Health Dept.)
Comments are closed.