Author Archive | Sue Nelson

My Reasons for OPPOSING the COVID VACCINE

Gorgeous Brain pic

  1. PERSONAL: Acute weeping eczema on my left ankle following a Hepatitis B vaccination in 1989, lasting 20 years till my 50th birthday in 2009. Family members can attest to the difficulties I had treating this successfully (which I did, finally, using Chinese Herbs).
  2. HEALTH: Coeliac condition diagnosed medically in 2013, resulting in multiple food intolerances every time I am in contact with chemicals (Antibiotics, Methyl-Iso-Thiazolinone in paint, handwash, detergent, etc etc).
  3. IMMUNITY: I also have Hashimotos, an Auto Immune disease whereby Antibodies are constantly attacking my Thyroid gland. I now know from my research that those same antibodies are also attacking other organs: the Brain, the Heart, the Eyes etc. Despite my best lifestyle interventions, those Antibodies are unabated. The last thing I want to do is to worsen them by introducing a dubious vaccine concoction into my Blood and Cells.
  4. PROFESSIONAL: I have treated numerous (bitterly upset) patients with devastating recalcitrant side effects from vaccinations, those side effects ranging from Acute painful Arthritis to Auto Immune Diseases such as Hashimotos.
  5. PROFESSIONAL RESPECT: I have treated 1000s of patients over the course of a 40-year career as an integrative TCM practitioner. I have been in continuous clinical practice, updating my knowledge and expertise annually.
  6. RESEARCH: I do a lot of research ranging from educational webinars to peer-reviewed articles to blogs. My research so far has indicated that viral vaccines are not as effective as the bacterial vaccines. The research also shows that antibody protection – such as in vaccines – is short-lived compared to T-Cell protection which really should be the focus of all Covid research. Note: Antibodies attack the virus whereas T-Cells attack the cell that has been penetrated by the virus.
  7. GLOBAL PANIC: I understand from my research that there is an aggressive global push towards Vaccines due to a rising panic – even before Covid – due to the failing nature of Antibiotics. There are strains of bacteria that are becoming more and more resistant to the ‘magic’ of Antibiotics (think MRSI Multiple Resistant Staph Infections).
  8. LONGEVITY: This is an understandable panic, as our longevity has only been made possible since the 1945 introduction of these powerful Antibiotics. Now the global panic has reached new levels with Covid, a deadly virus. Viruses cannot be treated with Antibiotics, and they tend to live in the body until death, sequestered in the spinal fluid (think Herpes, Epstein Barr virus and the Common Cold).
  9. CIVIL LIBERTIES: But this panic shoud not be dictating an erroneous course of action that denies us our civil liberties especially in regard to what we deem acceptable and safe to put in our own personal bodies! This sets up a dangerous legal precedent to continue on that path with other dictations.
  10. INFLAMMATION: We now know that Covid flourishes in inflamed bodies (Diabetes, High Blood Pressure, Cardiovascular anomalies). Why are we not addressing these systemic health issues? Will this poor immunity situation continue on, after the vaccine has been administered? Is the vaccine propping up these systemic health issues, even in the face of global concerns about Antibiotics failing fast and potential future viral releases?
    fat cell in the blood
  11. WORK ETHIC: Is the vaccine propping up the work ethic that dominates our society to the exclusion of all else (i.e. health and environment and animals)? Can we actually learn something about a good work/life balance in the face of corporate priorities, from this global virus?
  12. MEDIA HYPE: Why is the media so insistent on blatantly presenting one side of this debate? Why does the media aggressively push the pro-vaccine agenda? Is the media aiming to inflame and provoke viewers for a corporate-based agenda?
  13. MEDIA STAGMATISM: Why does the media want to stigmatise anyone who fears and therefore opposes mandatory vaccinations?
  14. FEAR IS AN ASSAULT: Even perceived FEAR is an assault according to section 75 of the Queensland Criminal Code Act (1889)! Anyone ignoring the sincere concerns of people opposed to vaccines, due to fears of biological impacts, is ASSAULTING them!
  15. The PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: Furthermore, everyone is entitled to apply the Precautionary Principle . It is encoded in all legislative frameworks of our country. The Precautionary Principle (UNESCO definition) says the following:

    A PRECAUTIONARY APPROACH IS NECESSARY FOR UNACCEPTABLE HAZARDS WHICH MAY REQUIRE ACTION EVEN BEFORE A CAUSAL LINK HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY ABSOLUTELY CLEAR SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.

    48762880 - medical science and scientific research abstract background

    The PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE applies fully to FEARS regarding the UNTESTED LONG-TERM BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS of the proposed COVID VACCINE.

  16. SUSPICION: Suspicion is not a bad thing when it comes to hastily thought out public policies that deliberately stigmatise a minority group (in this case, those opposed to a mandatory vaccination program).
  17. SUBSTANTIATE EMOTIVE ARGUMENTS: Those people who feel confident enough to attack and vilify vaccine opponents on the basis of ‘collective harm to others’ have never substantiated this highly EMOTIVE claim. Show us the peer-reviewed independent scholarly articles proving that personal refusal to vaccinate endangers the whole of society? Convince us in the same way you insist we convince you!
  18. RESPECT FOR OTHERS: It all boils down to respect and courtesy in the end. Why is the right to express an opinion granted only to the pro-vaccination proponents? Why should that right be withheld from the anti-vaccination contingent?
  19. JOBSEEKER/JOBKEEPER should be renamed STAY-AT-HOME ALLOWANCES: On the whole, Australians have been wonderful in looking after the collective good by foregoing their jobs to ‘stay at home’ during this ongoing Covid outbreak! This act of goodwill has left many of them vulnerable and without an income. Jobseeker and Jobkeeper are fair payments from the public purse of a wealthy country, designed to act as ‘stay-at-home’ allowances, even though the government of the day insists on retaining a certain language and attitude that does not fit with these new stay-at-home incentive payments!
  20. JOBSEEKER/JOBKEEPER MANIPULATION: How disappointing that our Prime Minister thinks it’s okay to manipulate people on Jobseeker or Jobkeeper to his personal agenda of mandatory vaccination! He has a captive audience of income-vulnerable individuals who have sacrificed their personal ideals for the good of the country! Now he is threatening to withdraw that payment – even though the individuals on it may have lost their once-secure jobs forever – if they do not comply with his personal preference for the epidemiologically untested – time-wise and scale-wise – Covid vaccine. It has certainly NOT passed the Bradford Hill criteria, by cross-referencing many different types of research methodology to fully satisfy safety requirements!
  21. FRIEND AGAINST FRIEND: The whole scenario is tipped to split Australian society right down the middle. The more the media hypes it up in the coming months – which is guaranteed – the more likely it is to pit friend against friend, relative against relative.
  22. MINORITIES FIGHT BACK: I, for one, am no stranger to being in a minority. I work in an unsupported health profession where Allied health practitioners do a weekend course and are allowed to use the term Acupuncture for their ‘Dry needling’ (my earned title after 4 years and 1000 hrs of TCM practice, not theirs), and I’m a Coeliac who experiences scorn in social situations from emotionally reactive people who are ignorant about this subject etc. I will utilise all my skills and energy to retain my rights.
  23. I WILL NOT BE FORCED TO VACCINATE AGAINST MY WILL
0

Rebuttal to 4 Corners APPALLING 5G program!

ABC-4corners_rebuttal-400x247

ABC recently aired a program on ABC TV entitled The Truth About 5G. It would have been more accurate if it was entitled ‘The Lies About 5 G” and they could have followed it up with a program on all the vested interests represented in this appalling piece of so-called ‘journalism’.

I grew up revering the high standards of 4 Corners journalists but no more…

What happened? Did the journo-in-charge think to himself or herself, “Oh gee, I don’t actually know anything about 5G”, having glibly accepted 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 4G LTE, Smart Meters, and wireless household products of all descriptions, all these years.

So who did they ring to get interviews?

  • Paul Fletcher, Communications Minister, also ex-OPTUS senior executive
  • Chairman of ICNIRP, the American Radiation safety standard body that Australia follows, THE BODY THAT HAS NOMINATED 10,000 micro-Watts per square meter as a ‘safe’ level of non-ionising EMF Radiation when lots of other credible Scientists, Doctors, Researchers and Legislative bodies – worldwide – advise 10 micro-Watts as the safe limit!
  • Chairman of ICNIRP, charged with looking after safety standards, certainly not qualified to talk about the medical and biological effects of those safety standards.
  • Former Chief Medical Officer, Brendan Murphy, who has no well-known, reputable publications on the subject of biological switch-on effects of EMF RAdiation.

Oh, and yes, who did they decide to deride and scorn in their program?

  • Some grassroots EMF resistance groups, containing sincerely motivated and well-researched individuals with a genuine concern for public health.
  • And lumped in with other more fringe-dwelling protest movements to make them look less than credible.

Aust on planet pic radiant

And what did they omit to say, in their so-called fact-finding program?

  1. The International EMF Scientists Appeal to Stop 5G
  2. Signed by 1000s of Scientists and Doctors from 45 countries
  3. Who, unlike Brendan Murphy, do have peer-reviewed scholarly publications on the subject of both Thermal and Non-Thermal ‘WiFi’ injury 
  4. These Scientists are extremely worried about the cumulative effects of 3G, 4G, and 5G
  5. They are worried that 5G has never been tested for safety, not even in the lab
  6. They are worried about the 60 GHz millimetre beam-formed wavelengths of 5G
  7. They are worried about the 20,000 + satellites in Space’s thermosphere, interfering with the Schumanns resonance, the harmonic tuning fork of the planet and all lifeforms
  8. These Scientists are calling the rollout of 5G AN EXTINCTION EVENT.

And what do we get from 4 Corners: an ex Big-Wireless executive, an American con-man, and a whole lot of facile nonsense that displays the complete ignorance – or laziness – of the 4 Corners journalists?

Or is it complete cynicism on the part of the program? If so, how sad!

If you agree about the poor quality of this program, and the missed opportunity to really delve into the truth about 5G, please watch the below linked presentation:

ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITIES SAFE FROM RADIATION inc (ECSFR)

Rebutting ABC 4-Corners_The Truth About 5G

then use the below link to write your complaint to ABC in no uncertain terms:

https://www.abc.net.au/contact/complain.htm

0

BARRISTER’S TEMPLATE for stopping 5G in your local area

5g pic from arpansa website copy

I heard Tasmanian Barrister Ray Broomhall speak on a recent 5G Webinar, and was very impressed with his high success rate in preventing 5G installations (and mobile tower installations)! He emphasised that PERCEIVED RISK is as potent as REAL RISK when it comes to our rights NOT TO FEEL FEAR from 5G WiFi exposure (60GHz millimetre beam-formed EMF transmissions and the rest of it!). FEAR, after all, constitutes an ASSAULT under Section 75 of the Criminal Code Act 1889 (Qld)!

He stresses doing your homework properly in this 22-step template: so that, for example, you know whether the objections to the council have expired; what is the level of emission to your home according to a Building Biologist; what are the costs of EMF shielding materials required for protection; where is the nearest EMF MEDICAL SPECIALIST…

This lateral thinking Barrister reminds us that ARPANSA cannot give medical advice, only medical doctors can do that (and only EMF savvy doctors, at that!). And the Precautionary Principle is encoded into our legislative system – we are entitled to utilise it when FEAR is a factor.

Ray’s template is incredibly logical and methodical, and while not being an alternative to legal advice, it is a wonderful underpinning document to consult. Here is the link to the complete set of guiding documents (not light reading, but truly fascinating!).

https://emrlegaleducation.com/legal-education-documents/

Ray Broomhall – EMR LEGAL EDUCATION

0

5G: An EXTINCTION EVENT Too Far!

5G planet pic

Image originally published on www.takebackyourpower.net

Why is the proposed 5G rollout being called an EXTINCTION EVENT by opponents?

And when I say opponents, I am talking about highly regarded doctors, scientists and signatories to extraordinary 2017 documents such as the 5G APPEAL (180 scientists and doctors, including several Australian signatories), and the INTERNATIONAL APPEAL TO STOP 5G ON EARTH AND IN SPACE.

GRASSROOTS OPPOSITION

On a more local level, councils throughout the world are attempting to stop the installation of 5G cell transmitters. All are upset that federal authorities control the 5G antenna installations despite the fact that the council owns the land on behalf of the residents. Here is a small sampler of government, court and council-driven campaigns:

  • Portland Oregon City, 24 march 2019 mayor and 2 commissioners opposed 5G installation
  • Florence Italy and Roman Distric XII, 28 march 2019, advocated the precautionary principle, and were critical of ICNIRP contradictions
  • Brussells 1 April 2019 Environment minister Celine Fremault halted 5G plans “The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt”.
  • Netherlands House of Representatives demanded research 4 April 2019
  • California Supreme Court Justices unanimously insisted on permits for 5G small cell antennas infrastructure 5 april 2019
  • German parliament is ready to suspend 5G rollout based on petition saying “scientifically justified doubts about the safety of this technology”, 8 April 2019
  • Switzerland’s 3rd largest region called for a moratorium on 5G, 9 April while 4 major regions representing 1.5 million citizens, called for a stop (failed, over-ruled by Telcos who simply bypassed it by upgrading existing antenna for 4G (20 April 2019)
  • Geneva declared a moratorium and called on WHO to do independent research for harmful effects, 11 April 2019
  • The Blue Mountains, Australia: Katoomba council voted unanimously to acknowledge serious community concerns over the coming rollout of 5G technology. Mayor Mark Greenhill promised to write to various government ministers for more information
  • Ryde, Sydney: Spokesperson Sue Cappadonna collected signatures from 100 residents of Ryde to remove small cell 4G antennas (later to be upgraded to 5G technology). She said ‘We don’t want it here, it causes us great anxiety that this thing is going to be running 24/7”.

SO WHAT – ON EARTH – IS 5G TECHNOLOGY?

5G is the 5th generation wireless communication network, coming on the heels of 4G LTE, our current technology. 1G gave us voice only, 2G gave us voice and text. 3G didn’t appear until 20 years later, giving us data for websites and emails. 4G gave us faster data and more calls simultaneously. 4G LTE is essentially the same as 4G but using a higher frequency of 2-8 GHz, as opposed to the 1.8-2.5 GHz of 3G.

2G through to 4G LTE Cell Towers have a constant ambient baseline for their 800-1000 Watt-beams i.e. they transmit in one direction from left to right –for example – 10 o’clock to 2 o’clock. As lower frequencies, they are considered centimetre wavelengths, and as such, can easily pass through buildings and foliage in the split-second journey from tower to mobile phone or wireless device and back again.

In other words, 2G – 4G transmitters have 1 single antenna – from the Cell Tower – broadcasting over a wide area.

CONSUMER SWITCH TO MOBILE PHONE DATA

Since the consumer switch from personal computers to mobile phones for daily data consumption, the 4G Cell Towers are apparently stretched to the limit. So the grand plan from the telecommunications companies is to initiate 5G technology, to work alongside the existing 4G.

5G will initially use the current 4G infrastructure but the bizzare jump from centimetre waves to millimetre waves requires new mini Cell Towers in ‘phased arrays’ every 2-10 homes within the urban areas. This is because the higher frequencies of 5G, from 6 GHz – 100 GHz, although having a latency speed measured in milliseconds, will not be able to penetrate buildings and foliage, as the lower <10 GHZ frequencies do.

So far, I’m describing the Earth base stations for 5G technology! These small cell antennas will be arranged in phased arrays, every 2-10 homes apart, emitting 30,000 Watts per 100 MHz of Radiofrequency spectrum. 5G will emit frequencies 100 x higher than the current 4G lower frequencies.

What’s more, they will not be restricted to the 10 o’clock – 2 o’clock constant ambient baseline of beam. They will be BEAM-FORMED i.e. focused, steerable, laser-like beams that track each other in all directions. There will be ricocheting and an aggregation effect from so many Cell Towers going in so many directions simultaneously.

MIMO: MANY INPUTS, MANY OUTPUTS

4G Cell Towers currently have an average of 12 ports whereas the 5G mini Cell transmitters will have 100 ports in what is technically described as MIMO, Many Inputs, Many Outputs for the following proposed purposes:

1) higher data transferNappy IoT

2) driverless cars

3) The Internet of things IoT (the nappy image shows a wireless transmitter being attached to the baby’s nappy to detect when it is ‘dirty’ and needs changing!)

4) faster video downloads

5) military applications.

An example of MIMO is the planned 5G mobile phone that will have dozens of tiny antennas sending out narrowly focused beams towards the nearest cell tower less than 25 feet from the home. Back and forth will ricochet these steerable beams for quick video downloads in seconds – not minutes – per 1000 people per metre.

SO WHAT – IN SPACE – IS 5G TECHNOLOGY DOING?

5G wavelengths will not penetrate buildings, and it is not feasible to put a satellite under the roof of a building. The roof would block the higher GHz wavelengths. So there are plans to launch 20,000 satellites into Space to help the 5G beam-formed signals get through buildings.

Let me repeat that for you:

5 COMPANIES PLAN TO LAUNCH 20,000 SATELLITES INTO SPACE TO IRRADIATE AREAS OF EARTH NOT COVERED BY GROUND TRANSMITTERS, AND HELP THE 5G BEAM-FORMED SIGNALS GET THROUGH BUILDINGS!

The Space satellites will emit 5 million Watts from the thousands of antennas.

Signatories from the THE 5G APPEAL document object to the ‘massive increase of MANDATORY EXPOSURE to wireless radiation’. There will literally be no place on Earth to escape the 5G EMF wireless radiation!

THE INTERNET OF THINGS IoT

Meanwhile the plans for driverless cars and suchlike will create 10-20 billion antenna connections among the IoT fridges, washing machines, surveillance cameras, self-driving cars and buses, nappies etc.

AUSTRALIA: OPTUS, TELSTRA and SAMSUNG

In Australia, OPTUS has been contracted to rollout the new 5G Home Broadband Package while Telstra has partnered with Samsung to rollout 5G Mobile Phones.

LACK OF INDEPENDENT REAL-WORLD RESEARCH

All the 5G research has been thus far conducted in a laboratory. Senator Richard Blumenthal grilled BIG WIRELESS agents about the research in a U.S. Senate Hearing, only to find that the telcos had put aside $0 for research into safety. He was appalled to discover that – despite investing a phenomenal amount of money into 5G already – there were no independent studies on the health and safety risks!

SCHUMANN RESONANCE

The 2020 planned Space deployment of 20,000 transmitting satellites into the ionosphere has prompted robust discussion of the Schumann Resonance.

The Schumann Resonance is a finely tuned resonance in the D-layer of the electrically charged ionosphere in Space, that is tuned to 7.83 Hz, the same as our Hearts (7.83 Hz) and Brains (8-12 Hz). This Schumann Resonance will be disrupted by the digital interference of 5G satellite technology.

Devastating health effects could involve lowered Melatonin – affecting sleep, mood, cognitive ability and energy. The Magnetite in the Brain – normally protective in the presence of Radiation – would be adversely affected. The magnetite functions of Haemoglobin-binding may be affected. Calcium leakage from Radiation damage – especially in the Blood/Brain barrier – would allow in free radicals and toxins. Oxidative damage to Neurons is a possibility.

John Patterson, a leading Australian radiation expert and activist, says that the digital disruption to the Schumann Resonance may potentially affect the spin of polarity of the body’s cells. ‘The body is like a spinning top charged through nature’s fields and waves.’

He says Radiation enters our bodies in the same way that light enters our bodies, through our eyes and skin, radiation entering the eyes assisting synchronisation and timing of the brain to the body, and conversely radiation entering the skin assisting time and synchronisation from body organs to the brain.

There is – understandably – huge international disquiet about the unknown effects of 5G technology.

Even weather satellites may be disrupted by having to share the radio spectrum band of 1675-1680 MHz band with 5G satellites in Space. US Weather Meteorologists are loudly demanding protection limits from NASA.

Page 1 of the THE 5G APPEAL document – drafted by scientists and doctors – declares, ‘Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plants and animals’. It is a horror scenario, a potential EXTINCTION EVENT, a catastrophe, an obscenity, a brazen step too far!

References:

  1. Bollinger, Ty ‘Cities Push Back as FCC Expedites Dangerous 5G Networks’ Posted in https://thetruthaboutcancer.com/fcc-5g/ Posted 15 march 2019, Downloaded 19/3/2019
  2. Cousens, Rabbi Gabriel ‘5G-A Toxic Assault on the Planetary Web of Life’ in http://treeoflifecenterus.com/5g-a-toxic-assault-on-the-planetary-web-of-life/?mc_cid=89974299e9&mc_eid=e08ab2e1e6  Posted 31/1/2019, Downloaded 2/3/2019
  3. Green Med Info Reporter, ‘Wireless Industry Confesses: “No Studies Show 5G is Safe” ‘ in http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/wireless-industry-confesses-no-studies-show-5g-safe? Posted 18/2/2019 Downloaded 20/2/2019
  4. Lewis, B C ‘No 5G in the Blue Mountains packs council chamber’ Local News Blue Mountains Gazette 31/1/2019
  5. Maisch, Don ‘Are community concerns over the 5G network rollout based on unfounded anxiety or valid evidence?’ Guest Blog in https://betweenrockand hardplace.wordpress.com/2019/04/25/guest-blog-from-dr-don-maisch-australia-are-community-concerns-over-the-5g-network-rollout-based-on-unfounded-anxiety-or-valid-evidence/ Posted 25/42019, Downloaded 26/4/2019
  6. Moskowitz, Joel ‘New 5G Network Spurs Health Concerns’ in Electromagnetic Radiation Safety Project, Posted 2/4/2019, Downloaded 5/4/2019
  7. Nyberg, Rainer & Hardell, Lennart (Eds) ‘Scientists and doctors warn of potential serious health effects of 5G’ in 5G APPEAL: SCIENTIST APPEAL FOR 5G MORATORIUM document Posted 13/9/2017, Downloaded 2/5/2019
  8. Raper, Ashleigh & Sas, Nick ‘Huawei-made ‘small cell’ boxes hit suburban Sydney, as residents raise health concerns’ in https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-07/huawei=small-cell-network-comes-to-sydney/10688124?pfmredir=sm   Downloaded 9/1/2019
  9. The Brussels Times Reporter, ‘Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now’ in http://www.brusselstimes.com/brussels/14753/radiation-concerns-halt-brussels-5g-for-now  Posted 1/4/2019, Downloaded 5/4/2019
  10. Trower, Barrie ‘WiFi Report – Humanity At The Brink’ in GeoEngineering Watch website, more info: emrrfsa.org Posted 13/9/2013, Downloaded 1/5/ 2019
0

Republishing LEGAL NOTICE for urgent distribution to EMF-aware consumers

radiation symbol pic

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONSUMER

DATE

 

(Electricity Retailer)

AGL Energy Limited

Level 22

101 Miller Street

NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2060

 

(Electricity Distributor)

cc Energex Limited

GPO Box 1461

BRISBANE Q 4001

 

SENT BY REGISTERED MAIL

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Regarding: Account 4… ….

Service Address: ADDRESS

 

NOTICE OF NO CONSENT TO TRESPASS AND SURVEILLANCE
NOTICE OF LIABILITY

Be advised, you and all other parties are hereby denied consent for installation and use of any and all smart meters or digital meters or any other surveillance and activity monitoring device, or devices, at the above property.

Any ‘implied consent’ is hereby withdrawn for the installation and use of any surveillance and activity monitoring device that sends and receives communications technology. Informed consent is legally required for installation of any surveillance device and any device that will collect and transmit private and personal data to undisclosed and unauthorised parties for undisclosed and unauthorised purposes. Authorisation for sharing of personal and private information may only be given by the originator and subject of that information. That authorisation is hereby denied and refused with regard to the above property and all its occupants, as signified by the directions clearly marked on our meter box and surrounds.

Until you can provide a manually read ‘interval’ meter and clearly demonstrate that it does not utilise remote communication via the use of a powerful wireless device next to my residence or office, I will not consider the replacement of the existing analogue meter. Until that time, consent is withdrawn for the following reasons.

Smart meters violate the law and cause endangerment to residents by the following factors:

  1. Electro-Magnetic and Radio Frequency energy contamination as emitted by smart metersis a Class 2 carcinogen according to the World Health Organisation, and has been proven in numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies to cause severe adverse health and biological effects.

http://www.pentictonwesternnews.com/opinion/307010961.html

http://www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/unpleasant-symptoms-after-smart-meter-installation/

http://www.magdahavas.com/austrian-medical-association-guidelines-to-diagnosing-and-treating-patients-with-electrohypersensitivity/

http://www.wireless-health.org.br/downloads/LatinAmericanScienceReviewReport.pdf

https://www.scribd.com/collections/3440803/Electrosmog-Bibiographies

  1. This unacceptable health damage extends to all animals, wildlife and plants.https://www.scribd.com/document/63829925/Is-Electrosmog-hurting-our-wildlife-149-references
  1. Smart meters invade privacy in the following unacceptable ways:
  • They individually identify electrical devices inside the home and record when they are operated.
  • They monitor household activity and occupancy in violation of rights and domestic security.
  • They transmit wireless signals which may be intercepted by unauthorised and unknown parties. Those signals can be used to monitor behaviour and occupancy and they can be used by criminals to aid criminal activity against the occupants.
  • They allow data about occupant’s daily habits and activities to be collected, recorded and stored in permanent databases which are accessed by parties not authorized or invited to know and share that private data by those whose activities were recorded.
  1. Lloyds of London does not cover health damage from EMF radiation, as per Exclusion 32, so it is unlikely that our public liability insurance would cover people visiting the house in the event of smart meter radiation damage. Anysmart meter installation would leave us vulnerable to lawsuits and real financial damage.
  1. Smart meters are a fire risk.

http://www.emraware.com/opposition.html#sthash.hXEiqHNh.dpuf

  1. I refer you to several Australian High Court rulings on Smart Meter Trespass which puts the liability on your meter installer should he/she ‘wilfully avoid’ this clearly communicated request based by us, the legal occupants, on soundly researched and thoroughly understood contemporary legal, safety, insurance and scientific arguments.
  • Kuru v State of New South Wales [2008] HCA 26 (12 June 2008)
  • New South Wales v Ibbett [2006] HCA 57; (2006) 231 ALR 485; (2006) 81 ALJR 427 (12 December 2006)
  • Plenty v Dillon [1991] HCA 5; (1991) 171 CLR 635 F.C. 91/004 (7 March 1991)
  • George v Rockett [1990] HCA 26; (1990) 170 CLR 104 (20 June 1990)
  • Halliday v Nevill [1984] HCA 80; (1994) 155 CLR 1 (16 December 1984)
  1. Your company has never adequately disclosed the health risks or the particular recording and transmission capabilities of the smart meter, or the extent of the data that will be recorded, stored and shared, or the purposes to which the data will and will not be put.

I forbid, refuse and deny consent of any installation and use of any monitoring, eavesdropping, and surveillance EMF Radioactive devices on my property, my place of residence and my place of occupancy. Any prior ‘implied consent’ between myself and AGL or Energex is hereby revoked.

That applies to and includes smart meters and surveillance and activity monitoring devices of any and all kinds and connecting devices including the ZigBee module. Any attempt to install any such device directed at me, other occupants, my property or residence will constitute trespass, stalking, wiretapping and unlawful surveillance and endangerment of health and safety, all prohibited and punishable by law through criminal and civil complaints. All persons, government agencies and private organisations responsible for installing or operating monitoring devices directed at or recording my activities, which I have not specifically authorised in writing, will be fully liable for any violations, intrusions, harm or negative consequences caused or made possible by those devices.

This is a LEGAL NOTICE. After this delivery, I will keep a copy of this registered letter of NOTICE on my meter box, and the liabilities listed above may not be denied or avoided by parties named and implied in this notice.

 

(You sign here)

 

(Witness signs here)

 

0

11 Steps to REFUSE THE SMART METERS in Brisbane this month

TICK PREFERRED DETOX: 3 MONTH or 6 MONTH Here are the 11 steps:

  1. Confirm the address of both your retailer and distributor from your bill or website (via the electricity distributor look-up tool). For instance, my retailer is AGL and my distributor is Energex (Energex sells wholesale electricity to AGL)

 

  1. Write a Notice letter – see my sample http://www.detoxonline.com.au/copy-this-smartdigital-meter-refusal-notice-and-send-to-agl/ – and post, by registered post, to both companies, ensuring you get a confirmation reply

 

  1. Lock up your analogue meter box with a good lock, one that can’t be cut with bolt-cutters

 

  1. Make the meter data (which belongs to the electricity distributor) accessible to be read

 

  1. Display a sticker – see the 2 samples

 

  1. Display a copy of your Notice in a secure weather-proof way

 

  1. Be wary that it might be called an ‘upgrade’ aka digital/smart meter installation

 

  1. Stay calm if the electricity meter installer harasses you

 

  1. Point out that YOU, as the legal occupant, own the meter box itself (renter or landholder) and have taken appropriate legal steps to protect it

 

  1. Point out that the meter installer is liable for WILFUL AVOIDANCE if he/she continues to attempt to install the ‘digital/smart’ meter against your wishes

 

  1. You have a common law right to protect your property – the meter box – from trespass. You have the right to resist having your possessions modified, devalued or damaged without consent.

WHO OWNS WHAT

THE ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTOR (e.g. Energex) owns the electricity provided by the retailer (AGL).

THE ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTOR also owns the meter itself and the meter data

THE LEGAL OCCUPANT (RENTER OR LANDHOLDER) owns everything else i.e. the wiring, the fuse panel, the metal box and the underlying building structure

 AER WATCHDOG

Don’t be told that you will have to pay an exorbitant fee for the analogue meter readings or have your electricity cut off, in the event of retaining your old analogue meter.

The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) oversees matters relating to the transmission and distribution of electricity in Australia. They have already ruled that consumers wanting to retain their old analogue meters in Victoria can do so, at a reasonable cost determined by the AER (NOT BY THE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTORS OR RETAILERS).

0

D-Day approaches for Qld Smart Meter Refusals

timeline - cropped

Several urgent emails have reached me in the past week, seeking advice on how to refuse the smart meters threatened for installation by the end of August in the Brisbane area.

It’s not an easy thing to do, to lock out an insistent Energex meter installer in the surrounds of your own home or office, in a way that feels un-cooperative to society. But let me remind you that the original brief – as outlined in the Victorian Auditor-General’s report of  2015 – was to replace accumulation meters (analogue meters) with interval meters. Somewhere between the 2004 Essential Services Commission’s decision to mandate the rollout of interval meters and the 2006 program announcement of  a rollout of 2-way communication ‘smart’ digital meters, there was persuasion by industry and a plethora of vested interests. As the Auditor-General’s report states, there was no consultation with the public, ill-prepared cost analyses and no explanation of the sudden departure from the original brief of providing manually read interval meters.

Both industry and government were blinded by the $ signs…

No long-term health studies have been done for these digital meters – they have been here for 5 minutes in the total scheme of things. There is enough doubt to warrant an immediate halt to these powerful 2-way radio transmitters being positioned in everyone’s homes and offices. Please forward this article onto anyone you care about, especially vulnerable children, babies, elderly and sick people who may be more susceptible to Electro-Magnetic Frequency Radiation effects and long-term irreversible sensitivity.

For the 11 steps to refuse a smart meter go to http://www.detoxonline.com.au/11-steps-refuse-smart-meters-brisbane-month/ .

For a sample of the Notice letter, go to http://www.detoxonline.com.au/copy-this-smartdigital-meter-refusal-notice-and-send-to-agl/

For a sample of the REFUSAL sticker to accompany your securely locked meter box, go to http://www.detoxonline.com.au/refusal-notices-meter-box/

3

OPT-OUT of digital smart meters in Q, NSW and SA before it’s too late!

digital meter opt out

No mention of an OPT-OUT

Act urgently if you are EMF-aware and DO NOT WANT A SMART METER thrust upon you in the next few weeks! AGL and other electricity suppliers are blitzing the states of Qld, NSW and SA. While insisting that it is not mandatory, AGL and co. are leaving it up to the consumer to reply forcefully to their letter being sent out with an OPT-OUT response by mail, phone or email within a week or 2 of receipt of the letter (assuming you get the letter and they acknowledge your opt-out submission)! We are in untested waters…

A consumer from Brisbane recently wrote into this blog, saying that AGL had insisted he need an upgrade of the board behind his meter. He was suspicious and when his own Electrician inspected the chipboard, he reported there was nothing wrong with it! This is exactly the type of pretext that may be used to enforce a digital smart meter ‘upgrade’ if you are not wary. As an added precaution, you should lock up your meter box to avoid any problems in the coming month – see my blog on how to do that.

Judging from past experiences of skullduggery – see the Victorian Attorney-General’s damning audit report http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20150916-Smart-Meters/20150916-Smart-Meters.html – you should be vigilant for all sorts of promises regarding the cost benefits that simply cannot be realised. John Doyle’s comprehensive audit from the Victorian Government concludes that the Victorian smart meter experience was an extremely costly one for Victorian consumers (costing the taxpayer 2.2 billion $ to subsidise the meter change) with a deplorable lack of consumer education about how to maximise any benefits. It ignored the fact that, overall, consumers prefer a fixed rate for their electricity usage. They do not want the ‘flexible pricing’ model whereby a mini radio-station is plonked next to their living rooms beaming out radio signals of usage every few minutes to save them and the electricity companies a few $.

This whole phenomenon started when the government asked corporations about an ‘interval’ meter reading, to save the costs associated with manual meter-reading. Unfortunately the ‘interval’ meter concept quickly transmuted into the ‘digital’ meter concept, without a full cost analysis or community consultation or a long-term health risk analysis.

The public have paid $2.2 billion to subsidise the smart meter rollout in Victoria and any savings have just gone straight back to the power companies who got to sack all the meter readers. The digital smart meters are like radios – they transmit all the data, without the need for meter reading. The problem is that anything that transmits like a radio is highly radioactive and it transmits all day and night without any let-up. Residents are getting 24/7 non-ionising radiation at unacceptably high levels. Don’t regret this, after the fact. Act now to lock up your meter box and be proactive in opting out of the so-called non-mandatory digital meter upgrade.

1

Copy this Smart/Digital Meter REFUSAL NOTICE and send to your Electricity Providers

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONSUMER

DATE

 

(Electricity Retailer)

AGL Energy Limited

Level 22

101 Miller Street

NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2060

 

(Electricity Distributor)

cc Energex Limited

GPO Box 1461

BRISBANE Q 4001

 

SENT BY REGISTERED MAIL

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Regarding: Account 4… ….

Service Address: ADDRESS

 

NOTICE OF NO CONSENT TO TRESPASS AND SURVEILLANCE
NOTICE OF LIABILITY

Be advised, you and all other parties are hereby denied consent for installation and use of any and all smart meters or digital meters or any other surveillance and activity monitoring device, or devices, at the above property.

Any ‘implied consent’ is hereby withdrawn for the installation and use of any surveillance and activity monitoring device that sends and receives communications technology. Informed consent is legally required for installation of any surveillance device and any device that will collect and transmit private and personal data to undisclosed and unauthorised parties for undisclosed and unauthorised purposes. Authorisation for sharing of personal and private information may only be given by the originator and subject of that information. That authorisation is hereby denied and refused with regard to the above property and all its occupants, as signified by the directions clearly marked on our meter box and surrounds.

Until you can provide a manually read ‘interval’ meter and clearly demonstrate that it does not utilise remote communication via the use of a powerful wireless device next to my residence or office, I will not consider the replacement of the existing analogue meter. Until that time, consent is withdrawn for the following reasons.

Smart meters violate the law and cause endangerment to residents by the following factors:

  1. Electro-Magnetic and Radio Frequency energy contamination as emitted by smart meters is a Class 2 carcinogen according to the World Health Organisation, and has been proven in numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies to cause severe adverse health and biological effects.

http://www.pentictonwesternnews.com/opinion/307010961.html

http://www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/unpleasant-symptoms-after-smart-meter-installation/

http://www.magdahavas.com/austrian-medical-association-guidelines-to-diagnosing-and-treating-patients-with-electrohypersensitivity/

http://www.wireless-health.org.br/downloads/LatinAmericanScienceReviewReport.pdf

https://www.scribd.com/collections/3440803/Electrosmog-Bibiographies

  1. This unacceptable health damage extends to all animals, wildlife and plants.

  1. Smart meters invade privacy in the following unacceptable ways:
  • They individually identify electrical devices inside the home and record when they are operated.
  • They monitor household activity and occupancy in violation of rights and domestic security.
  • They transmit wireless signals which may be intercepted by unauthorised and unknown parties. Those signals can be used to monitor behaviour and occupancy and they can be used by criminals to aid criminal activity against the occupants.
  • They allow data about occupant’s daily habits and activities to be collected, recorded and stored in permanent databases which are accessed by parties not authorized or invited to know and share that private data by those whose activities were recorded.
  1. Lloyds of London does not cover health damage from EMF radiation, as per Exclusion 32, so it is unlikely that our public liability insurance would cover people visiting the house in the event of smart meter radiation damage. Any smart meter installation would leave us vulnerable to lawsuits and real financial damage.
  1. Smart meters are a fire risk.

http://www.emraware.com/opposition.html#sthash.hXEiqHNh.dpuf

  1. I refer you to several Australian High Court rulings on Smart Meter Trespass which puts the liability on your meter installer should he/she ‘wilfully avoid’ this clearly communicated request based by us, the legal occupants, on soundly researched and thoroughly understood contemporary legal, safety, insurance and scientific arguments.
  • Kuru v State of New South Wales [2008] HCA 26 (12 June 2008)
  • New South Wales v Ibbett [2006] HCA 57; (2006) 231 ALR 485; (2006) 81 ALJR 427 (12 December 2006)
  • Plenty v Dillon [1991] HCA 5; (1991) 171 CLR 635 F.C. 91/004 (7 March 1991)
  • George v Rockett [1990] HCA 26; (1990) 170 CLR 104 (20 June 1990)
  • Halliday v Nevill [1984] HCA 80; (1994) 155 CLR 1 (16 December 1984)
  1. Your company has never adequately disclosed the health risks or the particular recording and transmission capabilities of the smart meter, or the extent of the data that will be recorded, stored and shared, or the purposes to which the data will and will not be put.

I forbid, refuse and deny consent of any installation and use of any monitoring, eavesdropping, and surveillance EMF Radioactive devices on my property, my place of residence and my place of occupancy. Any prior ‘implied consent’ between myself and AGL or Energex is hereby revoked.

That applies to and includes smart meters and surveillance and activity monitoring devices of any and all kinds and connecting devices including the ZigBee module. Any attempt to install any such device directed at me, other occupants, my property or residence will constitute trespass, stalking, wiretapping and unlawful surveillance and endangerment of health and safety, all prohibited and punishable by law through criminal and civil complaints. All persons, government agencies and private organisations responsible for installing or operating monitoring devices directed at or recording my activities, which I have not specifically authorised in writing, will be fully liable for any violations, intrusions, harm or negative consequences caused or made possible by those devices.

This is a LEGAL NOTICE. After this delivery, I will keep a copy of this registered letter of NOTICE on my meter box, and the liabilities listed above may not be denied or avoided by parties named and implied in this notice.

 

(You sign here)

 

(Witness signs here)

 

 

 

0