22nd July 2018 https://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/harvard-medical-doctor-warns-against-smart-meters/

Dr. David Carpenter MD, a graduate of Harvard Medical School and a physician who has worked in the area of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and public health for over 18 years, has a few choice words for power companies that are forcing smart meters down the throats of their customers all over the United States.

Dr. Carpenter adamantly insists that there is no evidence whatsoever that smart meters are in any way safe for human beings.  He goes on to say that there is, in fact, ample evidence that demonstrates “convincingly and consistently” that exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR) at elevated levels for long periods of time increases the risk of cancer, damages the nervous system, and adversely affects the reproductive organs.

Here is what one prominent industry expert who is also a medical doctor has to say about smart meters. Don’t wait until you have a health problem likely caused or exacerbated by these devices. Be proactive to protect your family!

Dr. Carpenter says that an informed person should demand that they be allowed to keep their analog meter.




Ranking Electricity Meters for Risk to Health, Privacy, and Cyber Security – Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. Retired US Govt Scientist


March 15, 2015 – Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D – Report ranking electricity meters on their risk to health, privacy and cyber security.

Dr. Powell is a retired career U.S. Government scientist who holds a Ph.D. in Applied Physics from Harvard University. During his Government career, he worked for the Executive Office of the President, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.


The manufacturers of electricity meters offer a wide variety of models. And many of these models are available with a dozen or so options, leading to an enormous number of possible combinations. These meters have capabilities beyond what is required to measure the electricity consumed for the purpose of issuing a monthly bill. Unfortunately, the new capabilities present a host of risks to health, to privacy, and to cyber security, as has been widely discussed elsewhere. But, briefly –

• The risks to health arise primarily from the fact that many electricity meters communicate wirelessly with the electric power companies. They transmit radiofrequency radiation, at microwave frequencies, day and night, every day of the year, forever. That radiation travels through homes and businesses readily, and penetrates the unborn, the children, and the adults alike, disrupting health. Every transmitting meter in a community irradiates everyone in that community. So does every community-based transmitter/receiver that the electric power companies have erected to communicate wirelessly with those meters.

• The risks to privacy arise from the fact that many of the meters capture and transmit very highly time-resolved information about electricity consumption. That detailed information can reveal much about the activities taking place inside the homes and the businesses, sufficient, for example, to reveal when no one is there.

• The risks to cyber security arise, in part, from the fact that some types of meters can accept incoming wireless commands that may come from nefarious sources. Many of those meters can respond to wireless commands to shut off the electrical power to a home or a business entirely, or to accept new software programming. That new programming can alter the functions of the meters and can do so invisibly to the owners of the homes and the businesses.

Download the Full Report Here (PDF)

April 2018 – Victory Against Smart Meters in New Mexico: Radiation-Emitting Surveillance Devices “Not in the Public Interest”

12 April 2018 – From Arthur Furstenberg

Dear Friends,

Today we won a victory in the fight against radiation in New Mexico. The Public Regulation Commission has denied PNM’s application for Smart Meters. “The plan presented in the Application does not provide a net public benefit and it does not promote the public interest,” wrote the Commission.

The Commission accepted the Hearing Examiner’s recommended decision without alteration. It ruled that:

• PNM did not demonstrate that smart meters will save money.
• PNM did not demonstrate that smart meters will produce energy efficiency.
• PNM did not show that customers want smart meters.
• PNM did not evaluate alternatives.
• PNM did not say how it would protect customer data privacy.
• Cybersecurity issues need to be addressed.
• 125 good, high-paying jobs would be lost.
• Proposed opt-out fees were unreasonable.
• There was insufficient public input.
• There was insufficient response by PNM to public objections.

EVIDENCE ABOUT HEALTH EFFECTS was discussed at length. “Customers who have strong feelings about the health effects of the meters should be allowed to protect their stated health concerns without a prohibitively high cost.”

The decision goes on to state: “The conditions of the portion of the population who believe  they are electromagnetically sensitive deserve acknowledgment and consideration as decisions are made regarding the implementation of an AMI Project. Accommodations could include reasonable opt-out provisions and fees and perhaps the selection of technologies that minimize the impacts on such people. Such accommodations may be desirable to minimize health risks to customers and address the needs and preferences of PNM’s customers. These are issues that can and should be addressed in a public input process of the sort PNM stated in its 2012 Report that it would conduct before bringing a smart meter proposal to the Commission for approval.”

The decision means there will not be smart meters in the near future in New Mexico’s metropolitan areas: Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Clayton, Ruidoso, Tularosa, Alamogordo, Silver City, Lordsburg and Deming.

Links to official documents and analysis can be found on the Smart Meter Harm website.

Feb 2018 – Smart Meters Could Leave British Homes Vulnerable To Cyber Attacks, Experts Have Warned – The Telegraph


New smart energy meters that the Government wants to be installed in millions of homes will leave householders vulnerable to cyber attacks, ministers have been warned.

The intelligence agency GCHQ is said to have raised concerns over the security of the meters, which could enable hackers to steal personal details and defraud consumers by tampering with their bills, it is alleged.

The Government wants every home in the country to have a smart meter, but only 8 million out of 27 million households have so far signed up to the £11 billion scheme.

They are designed to help consumers keep on top of their energy use and send meter readings electronically to suppliers, removing the need for visits to people’s houses to read their meters.

However, the rollout of a second generation of smart meters, known as SMETS 2, has been delayed because of worries about security.

The new meters will be common to all electricity and gas suppliers, meaning customers will no longer have to change their smart meter if they change supplier, as they currently have to do.

Cyber security experts say that making the meters universal will make them more attractive to hackers because the potential returns are so much greater if they can hack every meter using the same software.

In some foreign countries hackers have already attacked smart meter networks to defraud customers.

The cyber criminals are able to artificially inflate meter readings, making bills higher.

They then try to intercept payments, and if they simply skim off the difference between the real reading and the false reading, energy companies will think the bill has been paid normally.

Another potential problem is the meters being used as a “Trojan horse” to access other computers and gadgets around the home if the meters are able to “talk” to the other devices.

That would potentially give hackers the ability to steal personal information that could be sold on to other criminals.

There are also fears that countries such as North Korea might carry out a state-sponsored cyber attack to create a power surge that would damage the National Grid.

Nick Hunn, a wireless technology expert from London-based WiFore, told The Mail on Sunday: “This smart meter technology has created a Trojan horse. My understanding is that GCHQ was not best pleased when it realised how insecure these devices could be and is still not happy.

“The big problem is that the smart meter project is being blindly driven forward by career civil servants who do not have a clue about cyber security and who do not care as the taxpayer is footing the bill.”

Robert Cheesewright, of Smart Energy GB, the Government-funded agency promoting the smart meter roll-out, said: “Smart meters are one of the safest and most secure pieces of technology in your home.

“Only energy data is stored on a meter and this is encrypted. Your name, address, bank account or other financial details are not stored on the meter.”

Smart meters were developed by the Government with the help of GCHQ. Dr Ian Levy, of GCHQ, says in an article about smart metering on the National Cyber Security Centre website: “Of course, no system is completely secure, and nothing is invulnerable.

“However, we’re confident that the Smart Metering System strikes the best balance between security and business needs, whilst meeting broader policy and national security objectives.  Read Article HERE

Smart meters ‘only useful for providers’ – Assoc for Conservation of Energy

Source Article: Utility Week .co.uk

Smart meters fail to provide customers with “genuinely” useful information, and are only useful to electricity providers who can use them to cut costs, according to the honorary president of the Association for the Conservation of Energy.

Andrew Warren, who is also chair of the British Energy Efficiency Federation, slammed the technology for “not keeping pace” with the market, and failing to provide “genuinely interesting information”.

“It is very useful for people running electricity companies that need to be able to get to know their customers’ usage patterns better and to have more time of use arrangements,” he said.

“I think the main motivation for electricity companies, as they can make very substantial savings, is that they don’t have to employ or sub-contract meter readers.”

He added that the electricity and gas providers would be able to reduce the “enormous number” of people in phone banks run, as estimated billing is ended.

The government’s smart meter roll-out is due to begin fully in August but has recently been criticised by the Institute of Directors for being “flawed” and “well behind schedule.”

“It is a very expensive IT programme and there is a long litany of IT failures with which government has been involved,” said Warren.

“One of the greatest difficulties does appear to be trying to set rules on technologies to be installed in a marketplace in which the technologies are changing so fast, so that information is no greater than a meter that was installed 50 years ago.”

Warren said countries such as Germany “took one look” at smart meters and decided that “the costs were far too high”.

“It is a very substantial amount of money for the consumer and adds to fuel bills…it is perfectly reasonable to ask the question, are we actually delivering the best bang for their buck?”

Original Article https://utilityweek.co.uk/smart-meters-only-useful-for-providers-ace/

Smart Meter Campaigns Worldwide

Some campaigns and organisations around the world opposing Smart Meters
Take Back Your Power website and Award Winning Documentary

Stop Smart Meters (UK)

Stop Smart Meters (USA)

Smart Meter Harm

Smart Meter Education Network (USA)

Stop Smart Meters Australia

Smart Grid Awareness

EMF Safety Network

EMR Health Alliance of BC (Canada)

Refuse Smart Meters (USA)

Stop Smart Meters New Zealand

Dr Magda Havas – Smart Meters

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine Calls for Immediate Caution Regarding Smart Meter Installation – July 2012 – READ HERE

UK Parliament – The Science and Technology Committee invited views on the strength of the evidence in relation to smart meters – Read 586 Responses HERE

JUNE 2017 Smart Meter Radiation & Health – Why are we neglecting non-toxic alternatives?

Source Article  – THE ECOLOGIST – 6th June 2017
by Lynne Wycherley
Display from a BG smart meter. Just too bad about all the electromagnetic smog it generates. Photo: athriftymrs.com via Flickr (CC BY-SA).
Display from a BG smart meter. Just too bad about all the electromagnetic smog it generates. Photo: athriftymrs.com via Flickr (CC BY-SA).
With growing evidence of harm to physical and mental health caused by continuous pulsed em radiation from ‘smart’ electricity meters, Lynne Wycherley asks: have we underestimated risks to heart function and the nervous system? And of interference with embedded medical devices, such as cardiac pacemakers? It’s time to switch to over-wire or fibre communications to bring the ‘smart green grid’ of the future to electrosmog-free reality.

What struck me most was the common time-line: normal people, strange new symptoms, who only later discovered that a smart meter had been installed at the time or just before their symptoms initiated.

It is striking that the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called for a moratorium on smart meters (2012) and continues to veto them today.

Based on their literature reviews and clinical experience, they advised no smart meters should be located in or next to the homes of those with cardiac or neurological conditions, including Parkinson’s or dementia; or electrosensitivity; or cancer.

Their board wrote to California’s Public Utilities Commission: “guidelines for RF exposure used to justify installation of ‘smart meters’ are based only on thermal effects and are obsolete” – guidelines now under heavy fire from the 224-scientist appeal to the UN (see Part 1).

The AAEM continues: “Wireless RF radiation … effects accumulate over time which is an important consideration given the chronic nature of exposure to ‘smart meters’. The current medical literature raises credible questions about genetic and cellular effects, hormonal effects … blood / brain barrier damage, and increased risks of certain types of cancers from RF and ELF levels similar to those emitted by ‘smart meters’. Children are placed at particular risk.”

Footage has been published of smart meter transmissions disrupting the human heartbeat. Blind electrocardiogram field tests (16 May 2017), verified by Dr Gilberto Leon MD, an American GP, reveal smart meter heartbeat disruption in an apparently healthy adult male.

Repeated disruption was found at 1m from a smart meter in blind tests on a healthy adult male. Dr Leon warned this effect “silently makes our hearts work too hard“, a chronic stress.  He had to halt a later blind test (1.5m) on a woman due to the meter’s apparent, rapid impact. If such risks are confirmed by double-blind studies (if funded), or found at greater distances, should smart-meters be re-sited or withdrawn?

Electro-siege … RF-sensitive medical implants

Pacemakers, insulin pumps, deep-brain stimulators, cochlear implants, internal defibrillators (ICDs), spinal stimulators and other RF-sensitive implants are in growing use worldwide. Many of us have loved ones with such implants, and may face personal use in later life.

Geophysics professor Gary Olhoeft has a Parkinson’s deep-brain-stimulator that can be affected unpredictably around wireless technologies, even shutting off. He has given talks on the EMF cacophony we are creating – and its breathtaking short-sightedness.

During one such talk, everyone present indicated that their own medical implants had been disturbed by EMFs in the environment. On the lack of research into such interactions, he says “you have to ask: why is so little known about something that has the potential to injure or kill so many … ?”

Internationally, there has been no post-rollout monitoring of possible smart-meter / medical implant interactions, despite the meters’ 24:7 piercing microwave pulses, mixed modalities, and situations – such tiny shop units (UK) – which create sustained close exposure. Despite the new EU law on occupational EMFs.

Louis Donovan (California) testifies to four hospitalisations from pacemaker shut-downs, plus EMI that continually overrode his pacemaker, that coincided with smart-metering and ceased only on meter removal many months later. Baffled surgeons found no fault with his mint-condition device. Jerry Kozak (Canada) had chronic palpitations that overrode his pacemaker, relieved only by blocking his smart-meter. Though circumstantial, such testimonies suggest a need for vigilance.

In 2015, engineer Jeff Silverberg at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (USA) reported that “EMC information in regulation is often incomplete and has errors.” Noting that, numerically, medical implant interference problems may far exceed those reported to his unit, he flagged growing risks from the “proliferation of RF wireless technology”…