Steamed about smart meters


BC Hydro’s Fiona Taylor can “suggest” all she likes that smart meters are safe, but the fact remains the so-called studies BC Hydro is basing its safety claims on are grossly misleading and intentionally designed for this purpose.

When teaching children graphing in grade school, one of the first lessons learned is that you must not compare different units of measure on the same graph.

BC Hydro’s talking heads must have been absent for that lesson because that is exactly the method used in their regurgitated claim that 20 years of radiation from a smart meter equals a 30-minute cellphone call.

BC Hydro is comparing whole-body exposure from smart meters to peak ear exposure from cellphones on the same chart.

Dr. Daniel Hirsch, an expert on nuclear policy at UCSC, has analyzed the study and appropriately compared the two. His findings show radiation levels from smart meters to be, in reality, 100 times greater than  that from a cellphone.

Taylor also suggests the meters are only active for one minute a day. What she doesn’t say is that radiation spikes from smart meters are measured in milliseconds.

While this may sound insignificant, that “one minute per day” of activity adds up to 13,000-plus dangerous pulses of radiation penetrating our bodies, homes and neighbourhoods — per day, every day.

There are thousands of peer-reviewed studies conducted by prominent researchers that show serious and consistent health effects from prolonged exposure to radiofrequency radiation.

Canada’s Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health heard criticism about Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 from top international experts in the radiation-research field, yet Health Canada continues to dismiss biological research and  points to thermal guidelines.

This is like saying that smoking tobacco isn’t dangerous unless it burns you.

Health Canada is the same agency that has set exposure limits 100 times higher than most countries in the world.

This is the same agency that once told us thalidomide, asbestos, DDT and tobacco were safe.

This is the same agency that admits there is a lack of information on the effects of radiation exposure levels for children and that to experiment on them would be unethical.

Anita Johnson




We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

Related Stories

You might like ...