Page 1 of 396   Next›  Last» 

Liability Game-Changer: Hawaiian Electric switches to an "opt in" proposal!
Canada Created: 22 Aug 2017
Friday night I received positive news from safe meter advocate Debra Greene PhD which was so compelling that it has become the first InPowered Podcast installment.

https://youtu.be/AagT9eaAWwA

Here's the gist of what she told me:
- In Early 2017, several dozen Notices of Liability (and Non-Consent) were sent to the Hawaiian Electric utility heads, who were planning on blanket-installing 'smart' meters.

- Now, Hawaiian Electric has announced their COMPLETE SHIFT to an "opt in" plan -- in which the utility must receive explicit consent from the homeowner in order to install a 'smart' meter!

- Not only that, but the utility strangely denied that they ever even had a plan for blanket installation, despite it being openly stated for years.

This significant development is the first incident we know of where a state's major utility has changed policy to "opt in".

Go here for my 20-minute conversation (via YouTube video) with Debra:
https://youtu.be/AagT9eaAWwA

The evidence is clear: execs and officials (who are involved in causing harm) fear being held accountable in a commercial liability action.

As far as I can tell, we are on to something big. More news coming soon...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: InPower Movement, Josh del Sol, 22 Aug 2017

Professor of Medicine open letter against 5G rollout
USA Created: 20 Aug 2017
Beatrice Alexandra Golomb, MD, PhD, Professor of Medicine, UC San Diego School of Medicine.

August 18, 2017,

To whom it may concern,

I urge in the strongest terms that you vigorously oppose California SB 649.

If this bill passes, many people will suffer greatly, and needlessly, as a direct result. This sounds like hyperbole. It is not.

My research group at UC San Diego alone has received hundreds of communications from people who have developed serious health problems from electromagnetic radiation, following introduction of new technologies. Others with whom I am in communication, have independently received hundreds of similar reports. Most likely these are a tip of an iceberg of tens or perhaps hundreds of thousands of affected person. As each new technology leading to further exposure to electromagnetic radiation is introduced – and particularly introduced in a fashion that prevents vulnerable individuals from avoiding it – a new group become sensitized to health effects. This is particularly true for pulsed signals in the radiowave and microwave portion of the spectrum, the type for which the proposed bill SB 640 will bypass local control.

Mechanisms by which health effects are exerted have been shown to include oxidative stress (the type of injury against which antioxidants protect ,see optional section below), damage to mitochondria (the energy producing parts of cells), damage to cell membranes [1], [21], and via these mechanisms, an impaired “blood brain barrier” [3-5] (the blood brain barrier defends the brain against introduction of foreign substances and toxins; additionally, disruption can lead to brain edema [6]), constriction of blood vessels and impaired blood flow to the brain [7], and triggering of autoimmune reactions [8, 9]. Following a large exposure, that depresses antioxidant defenses, magnifying vulnerability to future exposures, some persons no longer tolerate many other forms and intensities of electromagnetic radiation that previously caused them no problem, and that currently cause others no problem. But this group deserves – nay needs -- the right to be able to avoid these exposures.
Affected individuals not only experience “symptoms” that “merely” cause them distress and suffering, when they are exposed – symptoms like headaches [10, 11], ringing ears [10, 11] and chest pain [10] from impaired blood flow, heart rhythm abnormalities [10, 11], and inability to sleep [10, 11]. These symptoms arise from physiological injury. Moreover, many experience significant health problems that can include seizures11, heart failure, hearing loss [12-14] and severe cognitive impairment [11, 15]. The mechanisms involved are those also involved in development and progression of neurodegenerative conditions including Alzheimer’s disease [16].

*SNIP* Read the entire letter via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Beatrice Alexandra Golomb, 18 Aug 2017

5G phone network: Expert concerned by lack of understanding of potential health effects
Australia Created: 19 Aug 2017
More research is needed into the potential health effects of new 5G mobile phone technology before it is rolled out in Australia, an international expert says.

The high-speed mobile phone network could be operational in Australia from 2020, offering up to 50 times the bandwidth currently available on 4G networks, allowing users to download the equivalent of three television episodes in a second.

Telstra announced last year it would run a world-first test of the technology for visitors to the 2018 Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast.

International radio frequency expert Professor Dariusz Leszczynski, from the University of Helsinki, told a public lecture at Griffith University in Brisbane on Thursday night there was a concerning lack of understanding about the health effects.

"We know only that this radiation penetrates skin deep," Professor Leszczynski said.

"We don't have the faintest idea how normal-functioning skin will be affected."

Australia's radiation safety government body, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), has backed calls to examine whether the country's current radiation safety standards need to be changed for the 5G rollout.

Research published on the agency's website said 5G technology could penetrate skin to a depth of 8 millimetres.

ARPANSA assistant director Dr Ken Karipidis said more research was needed.

"At the frequencies where 5G will be operating, the RF electromagnetic energy does not penetrate much further than the surface of the skin," Dr Karapidis said.

"Adverse health effects are not expected, and the current Australian Standard accounts for these.

"Nevertheless, further research in this area is required, particularly on effects on the skin and the eyes."
Radio frequency emissions a possible carcinogen

Professor Leszczynski was one of the 30 experts on an international World Health Organisation research team in 2011 that classified all radio frequency emissions as a possible carcinogen.

But ARPANSA said the Australian Radiofrequency Standard, based on international guidelines, protected the community from harm.

Professor Leszczynski said examining the health impacts after the technology was rolled out was not good enough.

"It appears we are having deja vu because in the early 1980s we thought that low-power emitting technology would be safe, no problems," he said.

"Thirty years later it appears it is possibly carcinogenic."

ARPANSA said it would be up to individual university research labs to pick up the agency's recommendations for more research into 5G frequencies.

A Telstra spokesman said the company ensured its wireless networks comply with Australian electromagnetic energy (EME) safety standards.

"We rely on the expert advice of a number of national and international health authorities, including ARPANSA and the World Health Organisation," the spokesman said.

"Research into EME, mobile phones and health has been going on for many years.

"The frequencies used by 5G have been used by other radio frequency applications such as satellite and radar for decades … 5G wireless networks are designed to be very efficient and minimise EME."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: ABC News, Isobel Roe, 18 Aug 2017

That was quick! ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS EXCLUSION document removed!
United Kingdom Created: 18 Aug 2017
7th of August we published the link to the insurance industry-wide exclusion for electromagnetic fields - and now its vanished from the source website, to instead return a "404" not found page.

Fortunately, we did archive a copy here on Mast-Victims, which you can get here below:

Aug 2017, United Kingdom: Insurance Industry: ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS EXCLUSION

Other ways to get the document text:

The Internet Archive "WaybackMachine" has a copy, here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160419160105/http://wrbmag.com/manuals/General%20Liability%20Forms/BMAG%20FORM%20CL%20CG%2021%2043%2003%2006%20Electromagnetic%20Fields%20Exclusion.pdf

And a HTML rendering of the document is still retrievable from Google's cache:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http%3A%2F%2Fwrbmag.com%2Fmanuals%2FGeneral%2520Liability%2520Forms%2FBMAG%2520FORM%2520CL%2520CG%252021%252043%252003%252006%2520Electromagnetic%2520Fields%2520Exclusion.pdf
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Mast-Victims.org, H. Eiriksson, 18 Aug 2017

Kamp mot 25 meter telemast i Djursholm – 'Handlar om strålningsrisken'
Sweden Created: 17 Aug 2017
Ett flertal Danderydsbor kan komma att bli grannar med en 25 meter hög telemast som Telia vill uppföra på Danderydsvägen. – Vi skulle inte bo kvar här då, säger en av de närboende.

Telebolaget Telia vill anlägga en 25 meter hög telemast i anslutning till Danderydsvägen. Mark som idag klassas som parkmark.

Richard Grassman bor med sin familj cirka 15 meter från platsen där Telia vill uppföra masten. Han, liksom flera andra som bor i området, motsätter sig planerna.

– Skulle det bli så att allt går emot oss och att Telia får igenom det här så är jag ganska övertygad om att vi inte skulle bo kvar här, säger han.

Grannen Björn Fransen menar att de är villiga att fortsätta driva ärendet långt om byggnadsnämnden skulle acceptera Telias ansökan.

– Det skulle innebära en så påtaglig inverkan, därför är vi villiga att driva ärendet. Det känns lite som att det är David mot Goliat och det är tveksamt om man skulle bo kvar här, säger han.
Inte första omgången

Men det här är inte första vändan i mastfrågan. Redan i slutet av 2015 fick miljö- och stadsbyggnadskontoret i Danderyd in en bygglovsansökan från Telia. I april 2016 beslutade dock byggnadsnämnden att avslå ansökan, dels på grund av att marken är parkmark, dels för att Telia inte redovisat andra möjliga placeringar.

– Våra gemensamma ansträngningar hade burit frukt, så det kändes som att bygglovet föll på sin egen orimlighet och vi tänkte att det hela var mer eller mindre avhandlat, säger Richard Grassman.

Men Telia överklagade beslutet till länsstyrelsen som hänvisade ärendet tillbaka till byggnadsnämnden. Länsstyrelsen menar att nämnden inte haft fog att avslå ärendet på grund av att Telia inte visat på andra placeringar. Nu har berörda grannar tid att yttra sig till den 22 augusti innan byggnadsnämnden ska ta ett nytt beslut.

– Dels handlar det om strålningsrisken. Där kan man se att det finns en korrelation mellan barncancer och strålning, men där står ord mot ord och forskare mot forskare, säger Björn Fransen och tillägger:

– Vägen här är frekventerad av många skolbarn, många bilar åker här och om det fastnar is som blåser ned så kan det bli väldigt olyckligt. Och skulle den välta så skulle den slå rakt in på vår tomt.

I sin överklagan menar Telia att bygglovet bör accepteras trots att det är en avvikelse från detaljplanen, något de menar har godtagits på andra platser. Vidare menar företaget att en placering av masten vid industriområdet på Rinkebyvägen inte skulle ge samma önskade effekt.

Danderyds Nyheter har sökt företrädare från Telia gällande deras överklagan i Danderyd utan att lyckas.

Kommunens sammanfattning av grannarnas synpunkter:

Placeringen strider mot detaljplanen. Avvikelsen kan inte betraktas som liten.

Platsen är mycket olämplig med hänsyn till närheten till villabebyggelsen.

Den höga masten ligger inom kulturhistoriskt landskap och förfular och förvanskar området

Oro för strålning från anläggningen

Det finns lämpligare möjliga placeringar

Marken nordväst om korsningen Danderydsvägen/Rinkebyvägen är ett alternativ då där redan finns ledningsstolpar, komersiell och industriell verksamhet.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Danderyds Nyheter, Kevin Wedin, 16 Aug 2017

Don't play with our children's lives! Uproar from parents over mobile phone mast to be built in youth centre grounds
United Kingdom Created: 17 Aug 2017
Parents are up in arms about a mobile phone mast which they say could harm the lives of their children.

The plans have been passed by Stroud District Council for the facility in the grounds of Frith Youth Centre, adjacent to Bussage playing field.

A registered charity which exists to provide a wide range of activities for local young people including various classes, the centre has permission to install the 24-metre mast yards from where children play.

More than 100 people signed a petition against the proposal, with their main concerns being the health impact, the surrounding countryside being AONB land and the negative visual element.

"The mast will destroy a bastion of microwave frequency free land for young children and the natural world to thrive, let's keep it a safe haven for the health of generations to come," said a message on the petition site to its backers.

The plans were approved without a public meeting to gauge the weight of opinion in both directions.

A recent meeting of Chalford Parish Council heard Cllr Paul Lily carried out substantial research into health risks associated with masts and confirmed it is not one with especially strong emissions.

However, similar plans in Painswick were recently rejected after public consultation.

"In my book if you want access to public money then you should try to act in accordance with majority public opinion," said one resident opposing the Frith Youth Centre project.

There have been health concerns over phone masts for years.

In 2011, the World Health Organisation /International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for a malignant type of brain cancer.

The Trustees of The Frith Youth Centre issued this statement: "We have agreed in principle to sign the contract with CILT for the mobile phone mast subject to further negotiation.

"The Trustees realise this will disappoint those who are unhappy about the mast, but having considered carefully the claims of the campaigners, the Trustees have concluded the interests of The Frith Youth Centre and the wider community are best served by signing the contract."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Gloustershire Live, Melissa Jones, 16 Aug 2017

Where have all the insects gone?
USA Created: 15 Aug 2017
Entomologists call it the windshield phenomenon - "If you talk to people, they have a gut feeling - They remember how insects used to smash on your windscreen," says Wolfgang Wägele, director of the Leibniz Institute for Animal Biodiversity in Bonn, Germany. Today, drivers spend less time scraping and scrubbing. "I'm a very data-driven person," says Scott Black, executive director of the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation in Portland, Oregon. "But it is a visceral reaction when you realize you don't see that mess anymore."

Some people argue that cars today are more aerodynamic and therefore less deadly to insects. But Black says his pride and joy as a teenager in Nebraska was his 1969 Ford Mustang Mach 1—with some pretty sleek lines. "I used to have to wash my car all the time. It was always covered with insects." Lately, Martin Sorg, an entomologist here, has seen the opposite: "I drive a Land Rover, with the aerodynamics of a refrigerator, and these days it stays clean."

Though observations about splattered bugs aren't scientific, few reliable data exist on the fate of important insect species. Scientists have tracked alarming declines in domesticated honey bees, monarch butterflies, and lightning bugs. But few have paid attention to the moths, hover flies, beetles, and countless other insects that buzz and flitter through the warm months. "We have a pretty good track record of ignoring most noncharismatic species," which most insects are, says Joe Nocera, an ecologist at the University of New Brunswick in Canada.

Of the scant records that do exist, many come from amateur naturalists, whether butterfly collectors or bird watchers. Now, a new set of long-term data is coming to light, this time from a dedicated group of mostly amateur entomologists who have tracked insect abundance at more than 100 nature reserves in western Europe since the 1980s.

Over that time the group, the Krefeld Entomological Society, has seen the yearly insect catches fluctuate, as expected. But in 2013 they spotted something alarming. When they returned to one of their earliest trapping sites from 1989, the total mass of their catch had fallen by nearly 80%. Perhaps it was a particularly bad year, they thought, so they set up the traps again in 2014. The numbers were just as low. Through more direct comparisons, the group—which had preserved thousands of samples over 3 decades—found dramatic declines across more than a dozen other sites.

*SNIP* Read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Science, Gretchen Vogel, 10 May 2017

Cancer Expert Declares Cell Phone and Wireless Radiation as Carcinogenic to Humans
USA Created: 15 Aug 2017
An expert cancer researcher and advisor to the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO/IARC) has issued his scientific opinion that radiofrequency (RF) radiation from any source – such as the signals emitted by cell phones, other wireless and cordless and sensor devices, and wireless networks – fully meets criteria to be classified as a “Group 1 carcinogenic to humans” agent, based on scientific evidence associating RF exposure to cancer development and cancer promotion.

“The evidence indicating wireless is carcinogenic has increased and can no longer be ignored,” stated Dr. Anthony B. Miller at a July 31, 2017 lecture in Jackson Hole, Wyoming sponsored by the Environmental Health Trust where international experts presented the best available science on cell phone and wireless radiation. In 2011, WHO/IARC classified RF radiation from any source as a “Group 2B possibly carcinogenic to human” agent. Miller believes the evidence published since 2011 fulfills the requirements to re-classify RF radiation as a “Group 1 carcinogenic to humans” agent.

Miller explained that the basis for his opinion includes recent scientific publications which include the 2017 re-analysis of data from the Interphone study, the 2014 French National CERENAT Study, several new publications on Swedish cancer data, and the 2016 results of the National Toxicology Program.

Dr. Anthony B. Miller is a physician epidemiologist who specializes in cancer etiology, prevention, and screening. Miller is Professor Emeritus at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health of the University of Toronto and Senior Medical Advisor to the Environmental Health Trust. He has been a longtime advisor to the World Health Organization (WHO) and was Senior Epidemiologist for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). He served as Director of the Epidemiology Unit of the National Cancer Institute of Canada, Chair of the Department of Preventive Medicine and Biostatistics at the University of Toronto, Head of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology at the German Cancer Research Centre, and Consultant to the Division of Cancer Prevention of the U.S. National Cancer Institute. He has performed research about electromagnetic fields and cancer and has served on many committees assessing carcinogenicity of various exposures. Miller was visiting Senior Scientist in the IARC Monographs programme as a reviewer to the scientific literature supporting designation of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) as a Group 2B possible carcinogen in 2011.

Other experts agree that the increased evidence now establishes RF radiation as a human carcinogen. For example, researchers Dr. Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg have published several epidemiological studies that found increased brain cancer associated with long-term cell phone use and conclude that “RF radiation should be regarded as a human carcinogen causing glioma.” In addition, published epidemiological research has also found persons diagnosed with brain cancer had decreased survival rates associated with higher wireless phone use.

In response to skeptics who claim “There is no evidence,” researchers point to published research that has consistently found increased cancer risk in well-designed case control studies that have looked at persons who used cell phones for more than ten years.

The July 31, 2017 panel presentation included international experts. Dr. Annie Sasco presented the WHO/IARC process used to classify carcinogenic agents. Dr. Devra Davis presented research finding wireless radiation results in sperm damage and alters brain development. Dr. Moe Mellion presented Dr. Iris Udasin’s clinical cases of World Trade Center first responders who developed brain cancer after combined environmental exposures to chemical toxins and wireless radiation. Theodora Scarato, MSW presented policies enacted by governments worldwide to reduce RF radiation exposures. Dr. Marc Arazi presented data released by the cell phone radiation test program of the Government of France, which found that when cell phones are tested in body contact positions, RF radiation exposure exceeds regulatory limits. Environmental Health Trust plans to post all lectures and videos from the July 31, 2017 presentation online.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Environmental Health Trust, 15 Aug 2017

Solution To The 'Smart' Meter Problem: THE INPOWER LIABILITY ACTION PROCESS
Canada Created: 15 Aug 2017
THE INPOWER LIABILITY ACTION PROCESS
Q: What is the Liability Action (or Notice of Liability (NOL)) process?
"By protecting our individual rights, we are protecting all life."
A: The NOL process is a mass action of people protecting their rights and enforcing liability for harm caused by "smart" meters. It is a powerful lawful remedy for individuals and groups to place liability regarding the various harms caused the smart meter agenda, onto those responsible or complicit with it. It is a comprehensive multi-round process, based upon sending a series of Notices -- pre-written templates customized for each participant -- which establish a framework for contractually-enforceable individual liability.

Over the past several years as "smart" meters have been rolled out throughout North America, we've seen other traditional legal approaches, complaints and appeals fail to achieve success thus far, as there appears to be an enormous level of systemic corruption and collusion involved, and those causing the harm are simply ignoring complaints. In contrast, the NOL process enables participants to access and reclaim their full unalienable rights, and uses the corporate system's own rules against them to enforce corporate and individual liability.

In essence, utilities are changing the terms of their service contracts with each customer, without the disclosure of facts. They are also using "implied consent" to assume a customer agrees -- even if the customer says they do not but uses an "incorrect" method of communication.

What the NOL does is recognize that a utility's desire to install a "smart" meter is a contractual offer, for which, in a written Notice, we conditionally accept if they can disprove our affidavit (a document we verify as true), point-by-point, in an affidavit of their own. If they cannot do so, our affidavit and terms stand, and each Respondent* is individually subject to the terms of our conditional acceptance. These terms include a fee schedule of a dollar amount of your choosing (as you have the power to create terms), per day that they would be in violation of your terms. These amounts are fully enforceable, and subsequent document templates and plans for enforcement are in place. Respondents are unable to disprove the statements made in the NOL or the facts used in the affidavit, because our facts are true and verifiable, whereas the propaganda they use is not.

The NOL process implements Contract Law, Common Law, Commercial Law (Uniform Commercial Code) and Law Merchant. It is multi-faceted, and operates in multiple jurisdictions. The NOL is based upon a higher level of understanding of how this system has been created & operates.

* - Respondents are utility execs and gov't officials who are promoting (or not yet openly opposing) the "smart" meter agenda.
Note about "smart" meter harm: For admissions from industry that utilities use "smart" meters to capture and monetize unlawful in-home surveillance data from YOUR home, see: www.bit.ly/smartspying1 and www.bit.ly/smartspying2. "Smart" meters also cause risks to your health, fires, hacking, and overbilling. These are all likewise now proven. (See the documentary Take Back Your Power.)

Q: What are the results so far?
While the process will soon be openly available, there have been 3 "seed" groups in North America using this process to address the 'smart' meter issue. More than 250 individuals have participated at this early stage. The early results, though still somewhat speculative, appear to indicate a correlation between the liability being enforced and several Respondents resigning or not seeking reelection. However, many within industry or government will not admit to the NOL being a factor.

As an example, Corix Utilities CEO Brett Hodson received more than 100 Notices of Liability ("round 1") and or Notices of Fault ("round 2") from participants in BC. Five days later, his unplanned resignation was internally announced, and covered in Business In Vancouver.
Eight Seattle City Councilmembers received Notice of Default ("round 3") from 20 participants in Seattle, contractually being bound to $2.6M per month of liability. In the weeks that followed, 3 of these 8 announced they were quitting politics. Two of these, according to insiders, were entirely unexpected. And one quit before her term was up. Later, the utility CEO also resigned.
In Michigan, 4 of the 8 Respondents who were at the MPSC no longer appeared to be at the company within several months of being on the receiving end of the liability action. A city attorney also resigned 1 month after receiving the process, stating that the utility DTE has a budget of $20M per year to 'lobby' state legislators. And, the MI Attorney General began calling for a free opt-out, after being on the receiving end of the process. (At first, he attempted to refuse the documents; so Claimants arranged to have him served in person.) Are all of these results merely a staggeringly improbable "coincidence"? It is doubtful. One thing we know is that these indications are consistent with results of an individual application of the NOL process previous to "smart" meters, in which more than a dozen public officials stepped down from regional to federal levels.

In other cases, safe analog meters have been protected and not replaced with "smart" meters. The goal is that, by numbers of people engaging in this powerful process, the "smart" meter agenda will be discontinued. We are seeing confidence-boosting signs this will happen in conjunction with insider admissions that "smart" meters are both unlawful and harmful on multiple levels.
Note: when a Respondent leaves office, the liability remains attached to both their office and them as an individual.
Note: anyone can do the NOL process, no matter if they have an analog meter, a "smart" meter, or anything in between.

DOCUMENT TEMPLATES, VIDEOS, GUIDES: http://www.InPowerMovement.com
Click here to view the source article.
Source: InPower Movement, Josh del Sol, 14 Aug 2017

Insurance Industry: ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS EXCLUSION
United Kingdom Created: 7 Aug 2017
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE FORM.

The following is added to paragraph 2. Exclusions of both Section I – Coverage A – Bodily Injury And Property Damage Liability and Section I – Coverage B – Personal And Advertising Injury Liability:

This insurance does not apply to:
Electromagnetic Field Emissions and/or Radiation

*SNIP* Read the entire document via the source link below...

Document also archived here:
http://www.mast-victims.org/resources/docs/BMAG-FORM-CL-CG-21-43-03-06-Electromagnetic-Fields-Exclusion.pdf
Click here to view the source article.
Source: General Liability Forms, 06 Sep 2011

 Page 1 of 396   Next›  Last»