Smart meter effects could make BC Hydro susceptible to medical expenses and lawsuits.
Where is the evidence that smart meters are completely safe for our health?
There are confident opinions out there, but not truth which is based on factual demonstrable proof.
Smart meters emit pulses which peak much higher than steady cell phone discharges. In addition, even when the electro-magnetic discharge of smart meters is low, it is the pulsation which has the greater negative effect.
Do you want hard evidence? Well, the experiment has already begun.
In only weeks and months some of you have already experienced a difference in your health.
BC Hydro might avoid this, or use complex ways to confuse this, but we could easily categorize this as “immediate health problems”.
Some of you already have any of one these immediate effects from your smart meter. Wake up in the middle of the night more often, have ringing in your ears at various times, or have a head buzz like that of a really long cell phone call, have ear pain, have agitation, or have a tired body which needs more rest and can’t heal from an illness or injury as well as it normally can.
A few science and health experts confirm that between three per cent and five per cent of the population are immediately sensitive.
Ask around if you know of anyone in this minority.
“Cell phones used for the past 10-15 years (120-180 months) have not given us such problems.
Shouldn’t the government be more transparent, and confess to this kind of debatable (insecure) information to the public? This isn’t the type of advertising which BC Hydro prefers, because it makes them susceptible to debates about safety, which could easily transfer into medical and legal fees.
With such an unknown abyss, we will continue the lab experiment, but the sooner we change this course of action, the sooner we prevent further injury.
The crucial question, which needs to be addressed and debated, is, to what extent are smart meters harmful to our health?
This will be answered well in five, 10, or 30 years from now, but not yet.
For now, decision-making based on the precautionary principle is the better path for health; gambling with a province wide experiment is not.
See this short clip by Dr. David Carpenter, an expert in Public Health http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7L21XOC2wA&feature=related
This expert is likely in the top 1,000 in the world for this area of knowledge. Dr. Carpenter is likely able to observe more accurately than 99.999per cent of our population in B.C., and at minimum this clip demonstrates the wide ranging debate among experts, like the hazards of asbestos and smoking which were once a wide ranging debate. History can never repeat itself, but very similar mistakes of humans are very capable of repeating, if not using prudence, discretion, and the appropriate knowledge.