Smart Meter Harm

After Smart Meters were deployed in Oregon, one resident observed:

The trees started exhibiting grey/white patches on their bark, some patches as thick as paint. The bark was splitting on most trees, and appearing scabbed over and covered in fungi, lichen, and moss. Now these trees, from Portland, throughout Beaverton, Hillsboro, and Forest Grove are dying and falling to the ground at an alarming rate. ALL trees, that I have seen, are showing signs of disease or infestation, even the huge ancient ones.

These pictures are of damage to oak and pine trees in Monterey, California, where there are wireless Smart Meters and their mesh network. Smart Meter deployment began in 2011. This damage is accelerating. Now there is also Comcast Xfinity Wi-Fi.

[Note: the pink-purple color showing up on some photos is not part of the original photos and occurred when transferred to the web]

There is severe harm to the oaks and pines. The pines have deep cracks, fissures, with red showing. Some pine bark looks like it’s loose, merely sitting on the surface of the tree, ready to slough off. Some of the fissures are bleeding pitch. The oak fissures are getting deeper and broader.

How soon before these trees are fatally split to the core?

When tree damage in Netherlands started occurring paralleling wireless deployment, the Wageningen University did a 5-year study on aspens, exposing them to this radiation. They reported their findings in 2010. Their findings: that Wi-Fi radiation can alter growth patterns and cause bleeding and fissures in growing tree bark, and discoloration of leaves.

By the end of the study, at least 70% of urban trees in Netherlands were exhibiting these symptoms, whereas five years earlier, at the beginning of the study, 10% of trees were showing injury.

Wireless radiation causes cellular and nitrosative stress, impacts the immune system, causes calcium ions to leave cell membranes, making them leak, interferes with cell membrane function, damages genes and DNA, causes cancers and tumors.

British biologist Andrew Goldsworthy says:

Our present exposure to man-made microwaves is about a million billion billion (one followed by eighteen zeros) times greater than our natural exposure to these frequencies.
The Biological Effects of Weak Electromagnetic Fields, p. 4. March 2012
http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Biol-Effects-EMFs-2012-NZ2.pdf

Trees are now dying mysteriously from a variety of diseases in urban areas all over Europe and are also showing abnormal photoperiodic responses. In addition, many have cancer-like growths under the bark (phloem nodules) and the bark may also split so that the underlying tissues become infected. All of these can be explained as being a result of weak radio-frequency radiation from mobile phones, their base stations, WiFi and similar sources of weak non-ionising radiation. But first let us look at how living organisms use electric currents that they generate themselves and which perform vital functions in their normal day-to-day metabolism and growth. We will then go on to see how weak electromagnetic fields can disrupt these and bring about many unwanted biological effects.
Why Our Urban Trees are Dying, 2011. http://www.mastsanity.org/health/research/299-why-our-urban-trees-are-dying-by-andrew-goldsworthy-2011.html

The German report “Birds, Bees and Mankind: Destroying Nature by Electrosmog” detailed the research showing extensive impacts from artificial EMF and RF on birds, bees, and humans.

“Today, unprecedented exposure levels and intensities of magnetic, electric, and electromagnetic fields from numerous wireless technologies interfere with the natural information system and functioning of humans, animals, and plants. The consequences of this development, which have already been predicted by critics for many decades, cannot be ignored anymore. Bees and other insects vanish; birds avoid certain places and become disorientated at others. Humans suffer from functional impairments and diseases. And insofar as the latter are hereditary, they will be passed on to next generations as pre-existing defects”
Bees, Birds and Mankind, Ulrich Warnke, p. 47. 2007
http://www.kompetenzinitiative.net/assets/ki_beesbirdsandmankind_print.pdf

A 2012 study in India on impacts to plants found

“morphological changes like decrease in growth rate in terms of height, number of branches and leaves is seen in such plants. Their leaf size gets decreased, leaves become more brittle and they fell off early.
“The biochemical tests indicated that after exposure there is a decrease in assimilatory pigments like chlorophylls and anthocyanins which shows decrease in photosynthetic rate in plants. At the same time, the carotenoid pigment content increased which resulted in the aging effect,” director of Junagadh-based Noble Group of Institutions Ved Vyas Dwivedi said.
…”At the same time, carbohydrates like starch and cellulose which are the main constituents of leaf cell wall decrease upon long term exposure. Sugar and water content also got decreased,” said Dwivedi.
Shockingly, in tulsi, which is a medicinal plant, its anti-microbial activity reduced after the plant was exposed to electromagnetic waves.
…”Protein content of those plants which were exposed to radiation had fallen drastically compared to those plant which were grown naturally,” added Dwivedi.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/vadodara/Cellphones-ring-in-death-knell-for-plants-Study/articleshow/16715290.cms

Wolfgang Volkrodt, now deceased, was a physicist and an electrical engineer at Siemens AG. He conducted research into the harm to trees. He wrote numerous papers (1), some only available in German.

Wolfgang Volkrodt and fellow researcher Ulrich Hertel wrote:

“. . .There is also this important fact: any tree may act as a receiving dielectric rod or monopole antenna with the ability to both absorb energy from the wave passing by and to scatter the wave in many directions. If the polarization of the transmitting tower antenna matches the particular tree or trees (i.e. vertical orientation of the antenna which is usually the case for collinear dipole arrays on towers), maximum coupling or absorption of the wave energy by the tree will occur. Polarization and conduction currents will generally flow to the root system.
Chapter 11:“Brief Overview of the Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on the Environment” by Raymond S. Kasevich, BSEE, MSE, PE, Registered Professional Electrical ;Cell Towers: Wireless Convenience or Environmental Hazard? Proceedings of the ‘Cell Towers Forum’ State of the Science/State of the Law edited by B. Blake Levitt (2001)

Volkrodt provided evidence in his papers that forests are also being impacted, not by acid rain, but by the acidification of the soil due to “electrosmog.”

“Microwaves are ‘received’ by our trees and finally converted into electrical currents which flow into the soil….A type of electric rectification takes place within the cell membranes. In turn, the direct current that spreads from the roots into the soil causes a type of electrolysis. And this, in turn – and not ‘acid rain’ – leads to the soil ‘acidification’ which is being repeatedly observed in the ground under trees exhibiting the new type of forest damage.”
Are Microwaves faced with a fiasco similar to that experienced by nuclear energy? 1991
http://www.mindfully.org/Technology/Microwaves-Fiasco-Volkrodt1991.htm

Trees are fellow creatures – alive, intelligent and sentient — and elders.

Completely ignoring that fact , they and phytoplankton also provide most of the world’s oxygen.

Fukushima radiation is rapidly destroying the Pacific Ocean and its sea life. With wireless radiation killing trees, how long before oxygen becomes a scarce commodity? How long before we have to ration oxygen?

The wireless mesh network and star system of Smart Meters are a powerful part of the problem. Then, Comcast is deploying its Xfinity and creating Wi-Fi hotspots everywhere. Wi-Max is being deployed, blanketing whole cities or areas. The U.S. and states like California are pushing broadband (generally wireless) throughout the country. Google wants to broadcast from the sky.

That’s in addition to cell towers, radio and TV broadcasting antennas, and satellites.

How long before human technology kills all life, directly or indirectly?

How many research studies have to be done before people listen?

—————————————————————————–

(1) Wolfgang Volkrodt, Ph.D., former Siemens scientist in Germany, wrote and published several articles on environmental contamination by microwaves. “Our environment is contaminated by microwaves. At present, the consequences are largely unexplored; however, observations of trees offer dire foreboding.” The following pdf files offer an introduction and selection of Dr. Volkrodt’s research and supporting documents:

• Background Documents: A Collection http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/volkrodt_background.pdf
• Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/volkrodt_elect_pollution_environ.pdf
• Are Microwaves Faced with a Fiasco Similar to That Experienced by Nuclear Energy? http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/volkrodt_fiasco.pdf
• Microwave Smog and Forest Damage – Movement in Bonn after All? http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/volkrodt_microwave_smog.pdf
• The Forest Dies as Politicians Look On – Dr. Ulrich Hertel http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/volkrodt_path_dying_forest.pdf
• Letter to Professor Wm. Smith, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/volkrodt_letter_yale.pdf

From EMR Policy Institute http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/forum/

From Canada, posted at Refugium

Media Refuse to Publish Mayor’s Critique of Smart Meters

BC Hydro is the utility company for British Columbia

April 23, 2014

The following guest editorial about smart meters was written by John Ranns, the longtime Mayor of the District of Metchosin on southern Vancouver Island in British Columbia. Mayor Ranns wrote this guest editorial in November 2013 and submitted it for publication to the Victoria Times-Colonist and subsequently to other major newspapers in British Columbia. When his secretary followed up with the Victoria Times-Colonist about the status of his submission, the newspaper said it would not be publishing the piece because the piece was not topical. Mayor Ranns received no other replies from major media, and ultimately no major media outlets published his piece.

Read for yourself the opinion that British Columbia’s news outlets saw unfit to print.

Guest Editorial on Smart Meters

by John Ranns, November 2013

What I find most disturbing about BC Hydro’s forced imposition of smart meters is how readily politicians of all parties have abandoned fundamental principles of a free society in order to accommodate bureaucratic expediency. Individual freedom demands that government has boundaries. As far back as the 1600s the concept that individuals need sanctuary from government was established in British Common Law (still applicable in British Columbia), clearly stating that your home is your castle and the sovereign will not cross your threshold without following due process. Except now they have. In one stroke, the Province is saying that lawful citizens no longer have a choice in what enters or leaves their homes.

Although debate has been carefully steered to encompass technical arguments and ignore principle, there are two facts about smart meters that cannot be denied: They emit radiation into your house. And, when Hydro chooses, they will gather and disseminate personal information, which previously would have required a court order.

Whether the radiation is harmful or ultimately proves to be safe is not the point. What is critical to the issue is that many people believe it to be harmful, and now their sanctuary, along with their peace of mind, is denied them. Nor does it matter how little you may care what government, corporations, and hackers know about what you do in your home. What matters is that the safeguards protecting others who do care must remain in place.

And forget the argument that people are free to go somewhere else. In our current economy most people in this province who have a job and a mortgage have no choice but to stay where they are and do what BC Hydro dictates. For populated areas, supplied electricity has become more essential to life than supplied water. Urban regulations will not permit alternative sources. And those who could legally go off-the grid can rarely afford the expense. BC Hydro is a government-established monopoly, so there are no competitors to turn to for service provision. Under these circumstances the only protection an individual has are our elected representatives. Except in this case, regardless of party, they have determined that what is good for business is more important than long established individual rights.

Recently, politicians of all description prominently displayed poppies and paid homage to the sacrifices made by previous generations who understood that to maintain a free system over time it is necessary for certain principles to be inviolate. Government must conform to the principle rather than change the principle to accommodate the wishes of whoever happens to be in power. It is why we have Constitutions. Unfortunately many politicians these days don’t seem to think that way. They do not recognize that our jobs are not only to represent our electorate, majority and minority, but also to serve as guardians of the free system. Sadly we seem all too willing to thoughtlessly forfeit our freedom for the latest of fleeting conveniences that our runaway technology may provide.

John Ranns
Mayor, District of Metchosin

New Studies Show Health Risks from Wireless Tech

New Studies Show Health Risks from Wireless Tech: Warnings from the BioInitiative Working Group
University at Albany, Rensselaer, New York
April 16, 2014

The BioInitiative Working Group says evidence for health risk from wireless tech is growing stronger and warrants immediate action. The Group released a mid-year update covering new science studies from 2012 to 2014.

New studies intensify medical concerns about malignant brain tumors from cell phone use. “There is a consistent pattern of increased risk for glioma (a malignant brain tumor) and acoustic neuroma with use of mobile and cordless phones” says Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD at Orebro University, Sweden, according to studies released in 2012 and 2013. “Epidemiological evidence shows that radiofrequency should be classified as a known human carcinogen. The existing FCC/IEEE and ICNIRP public safety limits are not adequate to protect public health.”

The BioInitiative reports nervous system effects in 68% of studies on radiofrequency radiation (144 of 211 studies) in 2014. This has increased from 63% in 2012 (93 of 150 studies) in 2012. Studies of extremely-low frequency radiation are reported to cause nervous system effects in 90% of the 105 studies available in 2014. Genetic effects (damage to DNA) from radiofrequency radiation is reported in 65% (74 of 114 studies); and 83% (49 of 59 studies) of extremely-low frequency studies.

Mobile wireless devices like phones and tablets are big sources of unnecessary biological stress to the mind and body that can chip away at resilience over time. The Report warns against wireless in schools. Schools should provide internet access without Wi-FI.
“It is essentially an unregulated experiment on childrens’ health and learning.

Microwave from wireless tech disrupts thinking – what could be worse for learning? Technology can be used more safely with wired devices that do not produce these biologically-disruptive levels of microwave radiation” said Cindy Sage, Co-Editor of the BioInitiative Report.

Federal programs like ConnectED and E-Rate are calling for wireless classrooms while ignoring the health evidence. Hyperactivity, concentration problems, anxiety, irritability, disorientation, distracted behavior, sleep disorders, and headaches are reported in clinical studies.

Government reviews on health impacts of wireless radiofrequency radiation from the European Union and Australia continue to be inconclusive largely because they require certainty before issuing warnings. The FCC review of health impacts from wireless technologies is still underway, but has not affected the federal push for wireless classrooms.

See: http://www.bioinitiative.org
Contact: info@bioinitiative.org
David O. Carpenter, MD dcarpenter@albany.edu

http://smartgridawareness.org/2013/12/04/rf-fields-possibly-probably-or-definitely-carcinogenic/

From Smart Grid Awareness

December 4, 2013

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) generally categorizes agents (e.g., substances or radiation) into four (4) categories in terms of cancer causing ability:

• Group 1:        Carcinogenic to humans.
• Group 2A:     Probably carcinogenic to humans.
• Group 2B:     Possibly carcinogenic to humans.
• Group 3:        Not classifiable as to carcinogenicity in humans.

This article will demonstrate in a step by step fashion that evidence is mounting for RF radiation being considered definitely carcinogenic.  In the paragraphs that follow, information is presented showing how research data has accumulated over the past couple of years showing a progression from Group 2B to Group 2A, and finally to Group 1.  In addition, evidence continues to mount regarding other types of adverse biological effects caused by RF radiation emissions, some of which are summarized in the final section of this article.

Evidence for RF Fields Being Group 2B, Possibly Carcinogenic

In May 2011, IARC concluded that “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields [are] possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) … A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered by the Working Group to be credible,…”

As stated in the full IARC Monograph Vol. 102, for Non-Ionizing Radiation, published in April 2013, the evaluation for carcinogenicity was applicable for all radiofrequency (RF) radiation in the range (30 kHz to 300 GHz) of the electromagnetic spectrum.  Quoting the Monograph:

“[It] should be emphasized that the evaluations in this volume address the general question of whether RF radiation causes cancer in humans or in experimental animals:  it does not specifically or exclusively consider mobile phones, but rather the type of radiation emitted by mobile phones and various other sources.”  [emphasis added]

“The Working Group agreed to consider three categories of human exposure to RF radiation:  (a) environmental sources such as mobile-phone base stations, broadcast antennae, smart meters, and medical applications; (b) occupational sources such as high-frequency dielectric and induction heaters, and high-power pulsed radars; and (c) the use of personal devices such as mobile phones, cordless phones, Bluetooth devices, and amateur radios.”

“The overall evaluation by the IARC Working Group was:  Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).”  [emphasis added]

Evidence for RF Fields Being Group 2A, Probably Carcinogenic

Dr. Devra Davis and Dr. Anthony B. Miller, along with other co-authors, published an article in April 2013, entitled, “Swedish Review Strengthens Grounds for Concluding That Radiation from Cellular and Cordless Phones Is a Probable Human Carcinogen.” [1]

A noteworthy quotation from the article is as follows:

“By reviewing key epidemiological studies, some of which have been published since the IARC review, addressing methodological critiques of their own and other studies, and reporting the results of a meta-analysis of their own and the IARC coordinated Interphone study, Hardell et al provide new and compelling evidence for IARC to re-evaluate its classification of ‘a possible carcinogen’, with a view to changing that assessment of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones, cordless phones, and other wireless devices at least to a ‘probable human carcinogen,’ i.e. Group 2A.”  [emphasis added]

Consistent with the above evidence presented to support the Group 2A classification, Dr. Anthony B. Miller made a presentation on November 20, 2013, before the Toronto Public Works and Infrastructure Committee.  This presentation was made in opposition to a request for authorization by a communications company to install cellular towers/poles throughout Toronto, Canada (on the City’s public right-of-way) that were less than 15 meters in height.  The video for Dr. Miller’s presentation is provided below.  Some of the more significant statements in the presentation include the following:

“We set forward [in a recent paper] the reasons for our view that the proper designation now if [the IARC] Working Group were to meet would be Category 2A, … making it a probable human carcinogen.”

“We in public health believe in prudent avoidance.”

“When you deliver a potential [or probable] carcinogen over a wide area in the environment, you expose numerous people and you may increase risks to a small proportion, but you can’t identify who they are. … That doesn’t mean there’s no harm, and as you increase the dosage, as you increase the amount of radiofrequency fields in our environment, you will in fact increase the hazard.”

“It seems to me that unless I can be reassured that this proposal before you, … that what you are in fact setting, if you approve this, you are setting the scene for increasing cancer risks, probably brain tumors, several other cancers, which you will not be able to identify, I would say, for ten to fifteen years.”

Evidence for RF Fields Being Group 1, Carcinogenic

Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg published an article in November 2013, entitled, “Using the Hill Viewpoints from 1965 for Evaluating Strengths of Evidence of the Risk for Brain Tumors Associated with Use of Mobile and Cordless Phones.” [2]

This published article utilized causation criteria developed by Sir Bradford Hill in 1965 to provide a framework for evaluation of the brain tumor risk from RF-EMF.  According to the article, “all nine issues on causation according to Hill were evaluated.  Regarding wireless phones, only studies with long-term use were included.  In addition, laboratory studies and data on the incidence of brain tumors were considered.”  The results of the evaluation were as follows:

“The criteria on strength, consistency, specificity, temporality, and biologic gradient for evidence of increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma were fulfilled.  Additional evidence came from plausibility and analogy based on laboratory studies.  Regarding coherence, several studies show increasing incidence of brain tumors, especially in the most exposed area.  Support for the experiment came from antioxidants that can alleviate the generation of reactive oxygen species involved in biologic effects, although a direct mechanism for brain tumor carcinogenesis has not been shown.  In addition, the finding of no increased risk for brain tumors in subjects using the mobile phone only in a car with an external antenna is supportive evidence.”

Conclusions reached in the published article include the following:

“Based on Hill’s viewpoints and his discussion on how these issues should be used, the conclusion of this review is that glioma and acoustic neuroma are caused by RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones.  According to the IARC Preamble, the classification should be Group 1, i.e., ‘the agent is carcinogenic to humans’, and urgent revision of current guidelines for exposure is needed.”  [emphasis added]

“Because of the widespread use of wireless technology, even a small [health] risk increase would have serious public health consequences.”

Summary on Carcinogenic Effects and Discussion of Other Adverse Effects

Evidence continues to mount that radiofrequency fields are harmful to humans and that RF emissions should not be treated in the same vein, for example, as “picked vegetables as traditionally prepared in Asia” (which is also an agent categorized as Group 2B by the IARC organization).  With mounting evidence that RF radiation is definitely carcinogenic and the fact that exposure to our population is increasing at an exponential rate from a variety of RF sources, the potential consequences are catastrophic.  Because of the potential long-term ramifications, prudent avoidance measures should be implemented immediately by all governments, corporations, schools, and individuals.

Furthermore, this article has yet only highlighted the recent developments in establishing the carcinogenic nature of RF radiation.  Evidence continues to also mount for other adverse biological effects as well, such as those described by Magda Havas in another recent article published in November 2013, entitled “Radiation from Wireless Technology Affects the Blood, the Heart, and the Autonomic Nervous System.” [3]

The Havas article describes how radiation from wireless technology affects the blood, the heart, and the autonomic nervous system.  Certainly to some individuals, these adverse effects represent a much more imminent threat than do the more long-term carcinogenic effects.  According to Havas:

“Exposure to electrosmog generated by electric, electronic, and wireless technology is accelerating to the point that a portion of the population is experiencing adverse reactions when they are exposed.  The symptoms of electrohypersensitivity (EHS), best described as rapid aging syndrome, experienced by adults and children resemble symptoms experienced by radar operators in the 1940s to the 1960s and are well described in the literature.”  These symptoms can include “fatigue, sleep disturbance, headaches, feeling of discomfort, difficulty concentrating, depression, memory loss, visual disruptions, irritability, hearing disruptions, skin problems, cardiovascular problems, dizziness, loss of appetite, movement difficulties, and nausea.”

The final statements in the Havas article are:

“If we do nothing about guidelines and … fail to regulate the technology in a way that minimizes microwave exposure, then many more people are likely to become ill and some will die.  [See figure below.]

If we choose to minimize exposure by establishing biologically based guidelines rather than the current thermal guidelines, by encouraging wired Internet access in schools, universities, hospitals, workplaces, and homes, by installing wired smart meters, and by establishing RF-free zones for those who are highly sensitive, then we can reverse much of the damage that has been inflicted.  [See figure below.]

The choice is ours, and the real question is, ‘Do we have the foresight and courage to make the right decision or will we require a health tsunami before we act?’”

————————————–

References:

[1] “Swedish Review Strengthens Grounds for Concluding That Radiation from Cellular and Cordless Phones Is a Probable Human Carcinogen;” Devra Lee Davis, Santosh Kesari, Colin L. Soskolne, Anthony B. Miller, Yael Stein; Pathophysiology – April 2013 (Vol. 20, Issue 2), Pages 123-129, http://www.pathophysiologyjournal.com/article/S0928-4680(13)00003-5/abstract.

[2] “Using the Hill Viewpoints from 1965 for Evaluating Strengths of Evidence of the Risk for Brain Tumors Associated with Use of Mobile and Cordless Phones,” Hardell and Carlberg, Reviews on Environmental Health, Volume 28 (November 2013), Issue 2-3, Pages 97–106, http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2013-0006.

[3] “Radiation from Wireless Technology Affects the Blood, the Heart, and the Autonomic Nervous System,” Magda Havas, Reviews on Environmental Health, Volume 28 (November 2013), Issue 2-3, Pages 75–84, http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2013-0004.

A PDF “reprint” version of this blog posting is available at:

http://skyvisionsolutions.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/rf-radiation-evidence-mounts-toward-carcinogenic-by-skyvision-solutions-2014.pdf.

ZigBee: The Wireless Standard for AMI, HANs and Demand Response
https://docs.zigbee.org/zigbee-docs/dcn/07-5177.pdf

HAN = Home Area Network

AMI is de­fined as the communications hardware and software  and  associated  system  and  data  management   software   that   creates   a   network   between advanced  meters  and  utility  business  systems.   This allows  collection  and  distribution  of  information  to customers  and  other  parties  such  as  competitive retail suppliers, in addition to the utility itself.  Importantly, it connects the utility to a HAN typically comprised  of  ZigBee-enabled  devices  including  appliances,  thermostats,  water  heaters,  pool  pumps,  and more.    This  network  of  ZigBee  devices  is  easy  to connect  and  allows  users  to  customize  and  monitor their energy consumption in an environment where devices communicate to each other and can connect to  the  outside  world  to  enable  remote  access  and control  either  by  the  utility,  a  third-party  service provider or the customer.

Is this complete denial or lack of imagination?

The San Francisco Chronicle reported on January 17, 2014, that hacking attacks have now been carried out against Smart appliances.

That spam that fills your e-mail inbox might be coming from inside your home – sent by a TV, a wireless router, or even a refrigerator that’s been turned against you.

Computers and smartphones have long been the target of hackers, but a recent online attack exploited security holes in more than 100,000 Internet-connected home devices and used them to transmit about 750,000 spam and phishing e-mails over two weeks in late December and early January, according to Proofpoint, a Sunnyvale spam-detection company that discovered the attack.

…The attack used the devices to relay e-mails, but didn’t affect their operations in the home.

“Hackers aren’t going to go in and turn up your thermostat to 100 degrees…,said Michele Borovac , a security specialist at Mountain View’s HyTrust.     Why not?

“…What was significant was that researchers have been warning that these new connected smart devices were going to be susceptible to these kinds of breaches, and we were able to show that the theory has turned into reality.”

From Security lags in protecting Internet-connected appliances. Ellen Huet
http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/Security-lags-in-protecting-Internet-connected-5153837.php#photo-5734988

How could an entire industry display such a startling lack of imagination and put our homes and communities at such risk?

Commercials tout the benefit of looking in on your children or pets remotely or unlocking the front door or gate. This wireless networked system provides an open door for crime, as well as creating many jobs in the never-quite-catching up cybersecurity industry.

The February 6 Los Angeles Times article below raises the specter of machine-gun-armed terrorists storming substations.

Attack on electric grid raises alarm
Damage to power station in shooting last year prompts worries over terrorism, Evan Halper and Marc Lifsher

Shooters armed with assault rifles and some knowledge of electrical utilities have prompted new worries on the vulnerability of California’s vast power grid.

A 2013 attack on an electric substation near San Jose that nearly knocked out Silicon Valley’s power supply was initially downplayed as vandalism by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., the facility’s owner. Gunfire from semiautomatic weapons did extensive damage to 17 transformers that sent grid operators scrambling to avoid a blackout.

But this week, a former top power regulator offered a far more ominous interpretation: The attack was terrorism, he said, and if circumstances had been just a little different, it could have been disastrous…

 More at www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-grid-terror-20140207,0,1524716,print.story

Alarming? Perhaps. But what about a much more pervasive and truly alarming threat posed by the government-sponsored  Smart Meter/Smart Grid program and the tech industry’s “internet of things”? What about something that could take down whole segments of the grid or the entire national grid, with a flick of the finger?

In one of many articles on cyber security threats to the Smart Grid, Jesse Berst writes:

Are smart homes a security threat to electric power utilities?
 July 31, 2013, Smart Grid News —

Quick Take: As we moved to the Internet of Things (IoT), millions of devices are being hooked up to the Internet. And each one creates another point of vulnerability, as economist Lynne Kiesling pointed out recently in a blog at KnowledgeProblem.com.

Much of the effort around grid security emphasizes securing access to control rooms and substations. Less attention goes to the security of home automation systems that “touch” the grid…

More at: http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/End_Use_Smart_Homes/Are-smart-homes-a-security-threat-to-electric-power-utilities-5914.html

Grid shutdown? A certainty with this dangerous system, thanks to federal and state officials, and private industry.

Who will pay the price? We will.

Well-known as the leader of Microsoft Canada, Frank Clegg’s latest article “INVISIBLE THREAT: The Link Between Wireless Radiation and a Host of Serious Illnesses” is published in the February 1 issue of Vitality Magazine http://vitalitymagazine.com/article/invisible-threat/

Clegg co-founded Canadians for Safe Technology (www.c4st.org) and says

We are convinced that there is nothing less than the future of our children at stake.

Since 2011, governments around the world have alerted their populations to approach wireless devices with caution…Lawmakers across our globe are developing safety rules… Many people are unaware that wireless devices use microwaves, the same as your microwave oven. So your cordless phone, Wi-Fi, smart meter and the cell tower outside your window are effectively functioning as low-level, constantly-emitting, microwave transmitters.

In Canada, various levels of government are largely ignoring the warning from the W.H.O. and are instead hiding behind “Safety Code 6,” an archaic federal guideline that is allowing Canada’s globally envied health care system to ignore our biggest modern health threat.

The FCC has the same microwave/radiofrequency guidelines as Canada.

Clegg’s website states—“School Boards across Canada… are endangering our youth by choosing to hide behind Safety Code 6, and provide WiFi in their schools.” Discussing the current push for “21^st Century Learning” and wireless tech in classroom,

I am discouraged to see School Boards such as Peel (in Canada) encourage students to Bring Your Own Device (BYOD). The campaign was designed by the tech industry and sold to school Boards as part of their international sales campaign “21’st Century Learning”

Footnote (15): The 21st Century learner campaign began in 2002 with a group of technology companies dreaming up how to sell to schools. It was soon disguised as an “education” campaign. This is the Cisco sales document: “Equipping Every Learner for the 21st Century.” [1] The bottom line is the Wi-Fi and wireless devices are needed in every class.

 Among his recommendations, which include Smart Meters, cell phones, and baby monitors,

I encourage everyone who is reading this with unexplained chronic health problems – including disturbed sleep – to turn off every wireless device in their home for a week. Write down what happens…

In 2012, the Austrian Medical Association also adopted guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of illness caused by wireless radiation.  (8) Austria’s checklist for physicians lists the following symptoms: sleep problems, fatigue, exhaustion, lack of energy, restlessness, heart palpitations, blood pressure problems, muscle and joint pain, headaches, depression, difficulty concentrating, forgetfulness, anxiety, urinary urgency, anomia (difficulty finding words), dizziness, tinnitus and sensations of pressure in the head and the ears, tightness in chest, hyperactivity, irritability, noise sensitivity, burning sensation in the eyes and skin conditions.[2]

He recommends getting involved to change national standards. He also recommends endorsing candidates for city councils and school boards that propose stricter wireless policies.

On TV, advertisements show people using their mobile devices, including Smart Phones and iPads, to unlock doors, monitor cameras inside homes, and change settings on appliances inside homes so conveniently.

Being promotional pieces, they do not reveal the downsides.

Former CIA director James Woolsey said in 2011,

What they’re doing now, they’re constructing what they call a “Smart Grid.” And they’re going to make it easier for you and me to call our homes on our cell phone and turn down our air-conditioning on a hot afternoon if we’re not there. Great, but that may well mean that a hacker in Shanghai with his cell phone could do the same thing or worse. And a so-called “Smart Grid” that is as vulnerable as what we’ve got is not smart at all, it’s a really, really stupid grid. (1)

Last year, Forbes ran the story “When ‘Smart Homes’ Get Hacked: I Haunted A Complete Stranger’s House Via The Internet”.

The Hatleys’ home was at my command after a Google search

“I can see all of the devices in your home and I think I can control them,” I said to Thomas Hatley, a complete stranger in Oregon who I had rudely awoken with an early phone call on a Thursday morning.

He and his wife were still in bed. Expressing surprise, he asked me to try to turn the master bedroom lights on and off. Sitting in my living room in San Francisco, I flipped the light switch with a click, and resisted the Poltergeist-like temptation to turn the television on as well.

“They just came on and now they’re off,” he said. “I’ll be darned.”

The home automation market was worth $1.5 billion in 2012 according to Reuters; there’s been an explosion in products that promise to make our homes “smarter.” The best known is Nest, a thermostat that monitors inhabitants’ activity, learns their schedules and temperature preferences and heats or cools the house as it deems appropriate. Many of these products have smartphone apps and Web portals that let users operate devices, cameras, and locks from afar. Getting to live the Jetsons’ lifestyle has downsides though; as we bring the things in our homes onto the Internet, we run into the same kind of security concerns we have for any connected device: they could get hacked.

 …Thomas Hatley’s home was one of eight that I was able to access. Sensitive information was revealed – not just what appliances and devices people had, but their time zone (along with the closest major city to their home), IP addresses and even the name of a child

… I could have wreaked serious havoc with this home. (2)

What are the possibilities of a home that allows remote control to lights, hot tubs, fans, televisions, water pumps, thermostats, garage doors, cameras, ovens, or a host of other “smart” devices?

An article in the news recently profiled a baby monitor that had been hacked.(3) And the hacker could see and talk to the children.

They heard a strange voice in the bedroom, shared by their two toddlers. When they got there, they realized the voice was coming from the Web camera they use to keep tabs on the children.

What they heard was ugly.

“He said, ‘Wake up, Allyson, you little slut,’” Gilbert said.

When he and his wife Lauren arrived, the camera swiveled to face them. The hacker proceeded to call him a “stupid moron” and his wife a bitch, Gilbert said, before he unplugged the camera.

How “convenient” is it when unknown entities can see the children and adults living in a home?

How connected do you want an outsider to be to your oven, your sprinkler system, or your home security system?

Pranksters, former spouses, people with a grudge, as well as child molesters, stalkers, burglars, and the government are examples of those who will have much easier access to your home and everything and everyone precious to you if you are part of this networked system.

Is that a risk you want to take?

Sources:

(1) http://www.energynow.com/video/2011/08/13/guarding-grid-08142011

(2)  http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/07/26/smart-homes-hack/  for the complete article and photos

(3) http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/14/tech/web/hacked-baby-monitor/