Media Blackout on Smart Meter Dangers

By James F. Tracy

Major power utilities continue to deploy “smart” electrical meters on businesses and private residences throughout the United States and Canada. Yet those in North America and elsewhere remain in the dark on the negative health effects of such devices that systematically blast their homes with radio-frequency (RF) radiation on a minute-by-minute, round-the-clock basis.

In 2009 the Obama administration partnered with utilities by allocating $3.4 billion in federal stimulus funds toward building a nationwide “smart grid,” where smart meters figure centrally.[1] The project is part of President Obama’s “Climate Action Plan” that under United Nations auspices seeks to reduce US carbon emissions 20% by the year 2020.[2]

There is more than ample research available that has associated negative health effects of RF radiation emitted by smart meters [3] for regulatory authorities to place restrictions on power utilities and compel them to abide by the precautionary principle. Such restrictions would require power providers to refrain from wide scale installation of smart meters until a sufficient body of scientific research demonstrating the safety of such devices has been produced and rigorously evaluated.

Yet in the US and elsewhere the imperative of having a “smart grid,” the prospect of a carbon trading scheme, lax (and in at least some cases corrupt) state and federal regulatory bodies, and the sheer power of the utilities combine to jeopardize the long term health of the entire population.

In a purportedly democratic society news outlets play a decisive role in such an impending health crisis. By failing to report on the dubious health research of smart meters and the fact that the public is being involuntarily subjected to such technology, news media are a key factor in the citizenry’s continued ignorance and inaction.

In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer categorized “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless cellphone use.”[4] Despite this warning from a well-recognized source, the utilities stubbornly insist that all residences must be equipped with a smart meter issuing dangerous electropollution.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ceased studying the health effects of radiofrequency radiation when the Senate Appropriations Committee cut the department’s funding and forbade it from further research into the area.[5] Thereafter RF limits were codified as mere “guidelines” based on the EPA’s tentative findings and are presently overseen by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

These weakly enforced standards are predicated on the alleged “thermal effect” of RF to which the FCC subscribes. In other words, if the energy emitted from a wireless antenna or device is not powerful enough to heat the skin or flesh then no danger is posed to human health.[6]

To this day power utilities cling to this severely outmoded and unscientific standard when confronted with the formidable body of research linking RF to cancer, destruction of DNA, and other negative health effects. News media seldom question the FCC policy when it is cited by utilities and regulators alike to underline the supposed overall safety of smart meters.[7]

An electronic LexisNexis search of newspaper articles referencing “smart meters” appearing between May 31, 2011, the date WHO classified RF a Class 2B carcinogen, and June 19, 2014, yields close to 839 pieces published in English language papers. Yet for the same time span only one tenth of the sample (82 articles) mentions “smart meters” and “carcinogen” or “carcinogenic” in the same report. Of these, 65 of the articles appeared in Canadian, and to a much lesser degree Australian or UK papers. Note that each sample includes guest editorials and letters to the editor penned by concerned citizens.

Using parameters from the date May 31, 2011, the date WHO declared RF a Class 2B carcinogen, to January 19, 2014, of 93 newspaper articles referencing “smart meter” and “World Health Organization,” 76 were published in Canadian, and to a much lesser degree UK, Australian, Malaysian or New Zealand outlets.

As the above suggests, the extremely limited awareness especially in the US of the potential health consequences of exposure to the continual RF emitted by smart meters is primarily because the issue is being blacked out in the press. When such dangers are reported, they are tempered by the refrain of the FCC’s “thermal effect” policy, which in light of the abundant countervailing research amounts to disinformation.

In December 2013 I contacted the reporter at the local metro-daily Palm Beach Post covering the state power utility, Florida Power and Light, and its smart meter policy to remind her of the bevy of public health and medical research documenting the likely consequences of sustained RF exposure. I also directed her to the WHO statement classifying RF as potentially carcinogenic.

To the Post’s credit a subsequent story highlighting Florida Power and Light’s “opt out” policy referenced the WHO statement. Yet the piece appeared deep in the business section of the paper, and the WHO warning was accompanied by the Florida Public Service Commission’s familiar rejoinder.

In 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields such as those emitted by cellular phones, microwaves and smart meters as possibly carcinogenic to humans.

The PSC has said its authority does not extend to health issues related to meters. Smart meters are certified for compliance with radio frequency emission standards by the Federal Communications Commission, and the FCC has deemed that meters in compliance with the standards do not have adverse health impacts.[8]

While one or more hidden agendas likely exist to keep the public unaware of the health dangers associated with RF and smart meters (again, think carbon trading, in addition to the social control possibilities via energy rationing and surveillance soon to be realized through the “smart grid,”) a more immediate cause for such censorship is simply profit and continued media monopoly control of public opinion and discourse.

The telecommunications industry whose services are largely predicated on RF has recently exhibited the largest growth in advertising outlays, which are surely recognized in bottom line terms by the news and media industries.[9] With potential continued revenue growth on this scale, raising questions and relaying information that can safeguard public health and allow citizens to ask intelligent questions concerning the health of themselves and their loved ones simply constitutes poor business practice.


[1] “President Obama Announces $3.4 Billion Investment to Spur Transition to Smart Energy Grid,” The White House, October 27, 2009.

[2] Ed King, “Obama Promises to Cut Carbon Pollution in Climate Action Plan,” Responding to Climate Change, June 26, 2013.

[3] See, for example, the American Association of Environmental Medicine EMF-RF Reference List (PDF) and AAEM’s April 12, 2012 Press Advisory (PDF).

[4] World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, “IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic,” May 31, 2011.

[5] Susan Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams,” San Diego Reader, May 18, 2011,

[6] FCC Office of Engineering and Technology, See also James F. Tracy “Wireless Technology and the Accelerated Toxification of America,”, July 7, 2012.

[7] When this author obtained documents through a public records request from the Florida Public Service Commission on Florida Power and Light’s smart meter campaign–a very simple and routine endeavor for any journalist–it was evident that no human health impact studies on statewide smart meter deployment were ever considered. The PSC merely accepted FPL’s rationale and related public relations literature.

[8] Susan Salisbury, “Media Opt-Out Fee to Be Considered, PSC Staff Proposes Enrollment, Monthly Cost for Device For Device Foes,” Palm Beach Post, January 3, 2014, B4.

[9] “Ad Spend By Sector: Consumer Goods and Telecom Take the Cake in 2012,”, April 25, 2013.

Republished at on January 21, 2014.

34 thoughts on “Media Blackout on Smart Meter Dangers”

  1. Does anyone KNOW the source of all this RF radiation? Is it coming from the meter itself, or does it go thru the entire home via the wiring?

    I’m asking, because if its the meter you may be able to shield it, or box it in somehow, and defeat the RF waves. Maybe just enclose it in a small Faraday cage… they may force it onto you, but I doubt they can stop you from blocking the RF inside your home. I’d read somewhere that even mylar can block RF. True?

    1. Each SM has a transmitter inside that communicates with other nearby meters to create a “mesh network.” The information transmitted is routed through a pivot or nodal SM that send such info back to the utility. The pulse is of course more intense the closer one’s proximity to the meter, yet the pollution is also measurable throughout the home. Further, aside from RF SMs generate “dirty electricity” that runs through electrical lines and household wiring.

      There are varieties of metallic shielding (available online through Less EMF and other outlets) one can use to lessen the RF impact of the SM on those in your home.

  2. Most health concerns about the meters arise from the pulsed radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted by wireless smart meters. Members of the California State Assembly asked the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) to study the issue of potential health impacts from smart meters. The CCST report in April 2011 found no health impacts, based both on lack of scientific evidence of harmful effects from radio frequency (RF) waves and that the RF exposure of people in their homes to smart meters is likely to be minuscule compared to RF exposure to cell phones and microwave ovens.

    1. Birtram, it looks as if you are making a comeback here under a different pseudonym, yet your IP is the same. I have already asked that you refrain from further troll activity here. Why do you persist?

      Citing the CCST’s review in this regard is disingenuous. It is no secret that the body excluded expert reports that did not fit its agenda for the 2011 paper. See, for example, Dr. Magda Havas’ commentary here. Other dissenting scientists called upon by CCST whose opinions were censored included Dr. De-Kun Li. His 2012 testimony before the Maine Public Utility Commission may be viewed here.

  3. Seems the high frequency pulses they are using in weather modification pose more of a danger, indeed hundreds loose their lives and homes in manmade storms.

    Posted a link previously when NPR talked about cloud seeding and admitted ‘some’ was done with airplanes. Why is the heck are they not making rain in CA?

    Here we have Dr. Michio Kaku at CBS, talking about weather modification with lasers, he slips and said the government used monsoons in Vietnam to flush out the enemy, the anchor corrects him, you mean allegedly right? Right.

    1. “Here we have Dr. Michio Kaku at CBS, talking about weather modification with lasers, he slips and said the government used monsoons in Vietnam to flush out the enemy, the anchor corrects him, you mean allegedly right? Right.”

      Cloud seeding the Ho Chi Minh trail isn’t exactly a secret anymore. It was called Operation Popeye and it ran from 1967 to 1972.

      “Why is the heck are they not making rain in CA?”

      Because they don’t want it to.

      Weather Modification Inc. out of Bowman, ND can adjust any weather patterns using cloud seeding for a price. I even heard an interview with one of their associates that said that they could break up a hurricane if they wanted to.

      This is, of course, old-school, and different from the scalar wave technology that people speculate about. Nevertheless, it’s still effective enough to maintain a business.

      1. Thats a crazy site. They talk like it’s nothing, just a regular business, like man has been making the weather all along.
        Keeps going from 60 to below 0 in a couple days time where I live. Kids have only been in school 3 days since Christmas break.
        Just keep following the money to know who calls the shots. Watch and. see how these effects and new technologies will control more and more of our lives

      2. The interview with Dr. Kaku was very strange, think it was supposed to be a partial coming out but they forgot to tell the anchor.

        Have been on a blog that reports chemtrails and CA has reported them heavy for as long as I remember. Many are speculating whatever they are spraying is fueling the fires.

        They caused the crisis and now CBS is reporting the scientists and pilots may be able to help them. There is a chemtrail protest all across the country on Saturday, 1/25/14, expect the press will be all over that!

  4. Putting aside the suspected health effects for the moment, it is interesting that some of the long-range goals of the efforts to create this grid might be to “trade carbon” across state lines. Where have we seen such schemes before but with Enron, where they sold back power to Californians at an inflated price after the diverting it to Arizona or someplace, thus enriching themselves unjustly. It was a lot of hocus pocus intended to rip off the public. It might take a lot to prove the deleterious health effects, but the economic rip offs is probably what is driving this. Who after all initiates such things but con artists?

        1. The Democrats against Agenda 21 link is a valuable synopsis of the whole ruse–which is really globalization (one world government)–packaged in feel-good terminology.

          If anyone believes the ruling elite caste has the greater good in mind, observe what they have accomplished in Africa. They are laying waste to a whole continent. And they have just started on their goal to depopulate the planet. However, enough serfs will be saved to mine the mineral resources or plant and pluck the heroine poppies or essential bushes that secrete deadly derivatives for cocaine in other far places.

          They have it all figured out. It must be a burden to be so smart. Breeding people for special tasks is old school….

        1. Thanks Kathy. Back in 2006, shortly after arriving out west, I took part in the event listed in the link below under date 2.12.06. Two participants brought a stack of information to the hack Barbara Boxer’s office across the street. They were met with half a dozen DHS types barricading the entrance to the building. An assistant did come down to pick up the papers which probably were scrutinized to see how much the peons knew. So much for access to people’s representatives.

          Clifford Carnicom made an excellent DVD which he named Aerosol Crimes. I have a number of those DVDs to pass out for free at the right moment. That will be on the 25th when Los Angeles takes part in the global event at the Santa Monica Pier, walking distance from where I am now.

          Telling photos – then and now:

      1. JT – These climate change groups have only re-invented themselves from the failed carbon tax agenda of the global warming fraudsters.

        There’s plenty of talk about the rising oceans, the need for mass transportation, more bike paths and electric car charging stations. Ironic, that electric cars are not affordable even with huge government tax breaks, they use a ridiculous amount of that dirty electricity in their production and use, and their huge battery packs are a toxic mess and need to be replaced often, providing they do not catch on fire first.

        As evidenced by most country’s citizens reporting on massive chemtrail bombardments, the evil manipulation of weather is being orchestrated on a global level.

  5. This is an interesting subject for a number of reasons. Certainly, these developments and products are released for use with little or no consideration as to the health impacts.

    Increasingly we are surrounded by all manner of RF transmissions from hundreds (if not thousands) of sources. Where I work they are actively involved in installing these metering devices that use telemetry to transmit readings to a central control center.

    When you consider your cell phone, other’s cell phones, cell towers, and a host of other sources we are literally swimming in this radiation.

    Beyond the health issues are the control issues. What this makes possible is the ability to centrally control usage of utilities from an outside source. We end up paying for things we have no control over.

    There is also a concern that newer appliances will be “smart appliances”, a euphemism for a spy device right in your home. Some of the newer televisions supposedly track your usage and report that to a monitoring site.

    We are rapidly coming to resemble an ant farm. It is a dystopian vision.

    1. “There is also a concern that newer appliances will be “smart appliances”, a euphemism for a spy device right in your home. Some of the newer televisions supposedly track your usage and report that to a monitoring site.”

      Hey, it gets better. We are starting to see the first appliances that are grid connected so that your refrigerator can inventory your food and you can adjust your heat/AC from a browser on your phone. Trouble is, each device will have its own unique DNS addressing with all the attendant security issues that go along with it. People don’t use effective security on their laptops, their phones are almost always unprotected and now we’re going to have to update malware protection for my vegetable crisper. Uh…no, I don’t think so.

      I have gotten very, very good at telling folks “No, not interested.” No social media, no money center bank, encrypted email, organic food and so on.

      Just as a general rule, if it comes from the federal government or a multinational company, tell ’em to go fly a kite. That’s all it takes.

  6. Well my very intelligent buddy Patrick, whom I hope to have the honor of meeting one day, cautioned me on jumping for joy on the news that NPR was actually talking about cloud seeding, they are probably just planning on coming out with the weather manipulation our government has been doing since the early 60’s and pretending it is new. Low and behold, we have a crisis in CA and they hope they can fix it! It is on the MSM, CBS! Or is it really the Cia bs network?

  7. What’s even more horrific is that apartment complexes place entire groups of smart meters all on the side of one apartment – I have seen 18 and more, lined up next to and over each other in rows – so you literally have a WALL of smart meters on the other side of your apartment wall!

    How there can be no laws prohibiting this is beyond comprehension.

    1. Tammie, you are so right. I came down from the Mohave Desert to Santa Monica, California to condo sit for a friend for 6 months. I have been here for 2 months already and I’m on the first floor. There are 10 condos in this building and I have all 10 smart meters under the bedroom window. By the way, I call them death meters.

      Not only do we have death meters for electricity, but for the gas meters as well. Next is installing these meters for the water I hear. In a city like Santa Monica, which prides itself as being on the forefront of Agenda 21, although they do not call it that, one would expect more enlightened people. That is not the case, but the agian the meters are part of the Agenda. Santa Monica is also wall to wall buildings with very little land left untouched, so the ramifications are unthinkable.

  8. Thank you for this article! Readers with FP&L (Florida Power & LIght) who have refused/wish to refuse the so-called “smart” meters will soon be charged by FP&L for doing so, unless the Florida PSC reverses its recent decision to approve FP&L’s tariff request. Deadline for ratepayers to object to the PSC’s recent ruling is early February. Docket here:

    More details available at:

  9. In Italy, there are smart meters but instead of transmitting the info via wireless, they’ve got underground cabling. It’s my understanding that this system obviates the health problems talked about here (? please correct me if you know I’m wrong).

    The fundamental problem is not smart meters per se, but the fact that the frequency is being generated by a wireless system, through the air, right? I’m assuming that’s the same reason why Deborah Tavares has urged people to choose internet access via cables rather than wireless internet access, and to use telephones with cords rather than cordless ones…

    So it seems to me that if they want to foist smart meters on the public, one way of “compromising” with them might be to say, okay fine, but not WIRELESS smart meters. And then see how they react to THAT. After all, if this is all really “just” about convenience, and they’re not trying to hurt people, they should happily entertain that option! Thoughts?

    1. If the meters aren’t wireless, I doubt they would qualify as “smart” in the states.

      A primary reason such devices are dangerous is because of the frequency they occupy, from 1 to 2.5 gigahertz. There is already a good deal of research indicating that this is the most dangerous bandwidth for humans and other livings things.

  10. seriously behind the curve, but at least Politico did publish the confessions of a TSA employee, who did mention the RADIATION he was exposing the public to via the full body scanners. These enablers! They know they are exposing ppl to radiation and they “do their job” for the meager $$ while exposing ppl to cancer…

  11. Whenever I see articles on these Smart Meters two thoughts pop into my head:

    1) “Why are they doing this?” — and I can’t help but be very concerned about the negative aspects (the benefit to consumers here is negligible compared to the costs involved – more accurate billings and possible but unlike rewards for less usage…the companies’ data-gathering aspect is quite scary);

    2) “Why aren’t they spending funds on helping to ensure the electrical grid doesn’t fail / secure it from being taken out?”

Comments are closed.