Energy and Climate Change CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Louise Larchbourne (SMR84)

Summary of My Arguments

1.The freedom of individuals in a democracy to live as they choose, in compliance with the law.

2.Physical and other observed effects in my experience and that of others.

3.General serious health concerns based on experience in other democracies; scientific studies

4.The United Kingdom’s role in the world as an exemplar of individual freedom and freedoms (see 1.)

Who I am

I am a British citizen, a mother; I graduated in English and have been self-employed in publishing for most of my career; I am also and originally an actor and a writer. I love the world, and feel it requires some protection by all of us, balanced as we are now between production and destruction.

1. Firstly, I am surprised to see a government that almost by definition of its party ideologies should be a bastion of the rights of individuals to lead their lives with little state interference, even countenancing the forcible introduction of a device with such comprehensively intrusive function, but more powerfully, of a type which many people choose wisely to avoid. Many who do currently use wifi internet connection turn it off when they are not using it, as is their right and as appears to be medically advised worldwide.

2. I used wireless internet in 2009–10, and took a few months to work out that the subsequent dramatic decline in my health and capabilities was due to it. I became very confused, very forgetful, depressed and demotivated, and almost unable to get anywhere on time. I discovered that my red blood cells were “clumping” and forming “rouleaux” and then found out that this is considered to be an effect of the presence of wireless devices. [Symptoms of Microwave Exposure can vary from child to child. All of these symptoms have been reported by parents of children attending schools in Collingwood, Ont. The symptoms tend to subside when the children come home, or on weekends and extended periods away from their school.

Red blood cells seen under a microscopes after exposure to 90 seconds of cell phone microwave radiation (Wi-Fi or wireless router signals are microwaves just like cell phones) show that the cells have lost their polarity and integrity and are clumping together. This results in hypoxia or a lack of oxygen reaching the cells in the body’s organs. Due to numerous cells clumping together a cell’s surface area is diminished and this results in the inability of the red blood cell to take in sufficient oxygen.

Since the brain consumes 20% of the oxygen carried by red blood cells, the possible effects of this are a diminished ability to remember new things. Dr Gerd Oberfeld, head of Salzburg’s Public Department of Environmental Health considers Wi-Fi dangerous, especially for children, and has called for their removal.

“Wi-Fi in schools is basically a weaker microwave. With a microwave oven, you close the door and the microwaves are contained within the oven, whereas, with our schools, the microwaves are released into the environment. The school becomes the microwave,” says Dr. Magda Havas of Trent University. [http://www.themeafordindependent.ca/home/in-the-schools/663-local-parents-concerned-about-wi-fi-in-schools]

I am self-employed and became almost unable to work. My son and I now use a long cable connection. I am well, happy and productive. Just after all this my then electricity supplier actually sent me a smart meter; I tried it, but it had the same devastating effect. Some friends of mine, a married couple, started to use wifi also in 2009, both developed constant excruciating headaches and removed it at once.

3. In many European countries, for example Germany, France and Austria, and in Australia and Canada, it has been acknowledged that wifi is potentially hazardous to health and quite likely to damage brain development in children; a tranche of UK schools have removed it.

The WHO has associated it with increased cancer risk.

ICEMS (International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety) as you may be aware, in 2008 declared that they considered wireless technology to be hazardous, citing cogent recent epidemiological evidence.

Some studies in the UK have based results on guidelines considered by many doctors and scientists to be obsolete.

Reasons to at least be wary of wireless technology are:

(1)It seems likely to decrease human fertility, as indicated in 32 published studies since 2003 (out of 40 in total).

(2)Modification of brain activity (as in my experience detailed above).

(3)It is carcinogenic, especially to children.

(4)Three teachers in Sweden became ill and developed various forms of hypersensitivity when wireless networks were installed.

Here is a list of bodies that have asked for a moratorium or tighter regulation of this technology:

Vienna Resolution 1998; Salzburg Resolution 2000; Declaration of Alcalá 2002; Catania Resolution 2002; Freiburger Appeal 2002; Bamberger Appeal 2004; Maintaler Appeal 2004; Coburger Appeal 2005; Oberammergauer Appeal 2005; Haibacher Appeal 2005;
Pfarrkirchener Appeal 2005; Freienbacher Appeal 2005;Lichtenfelser Appeal 2005; Hofer Appeal 2005; Helsinki Appeal 2005; Parish Kirchner Appeal 2005; Saarlander Appeal 2005; Stockacher Appeal 2005; Benevento Resolution 2006; Allgäuer Appeal 2006; WiMax Appeal 2006; Schlüchterner appeal; Brussels Appeal 2007; Venice Resolution 2008; Berlin Appeal 2008; Paris Appeal 2009; London Resolution 2009; Porto Alegre Resolution 2009; European Parliament EMF Resolution 2009; Dutch Appeal 2009; Int’l Appeal of Würzburg 2010; Copenhagen Resolution 2010; Seletun Consensus Statement 2010

Last year The American Academy of Environmental Medicine said:

Chronic exposure to wireless radiofrequency radiation is a preventable environmental hazard that is sufficiently well documented to warrant immediate preventative public health action...

In 2009 the EU called for circumspection in the deployment of wireless technology, which it acknowledged as hazardous, and also sid that the previously established limits to exposure were obsolete.

In 2011 the Council of Europe asked all European governments to take steps to reduce exposure to EMFS and to prefer wired Internet connections, especially for children.

Last year both The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection and the Israeli Health Minister demanded wifi not be allowed in schools. They are not alone.

Data indicates that where these meters have been installed, household bills have increased!

4. Our Energy and Climate Change Minister Baroness Verma has said: “The introduction of smart meters nationwide is of course an enormous challenge. Let me be clear: the consumer comes first. That’s why we are tackling issues such as privacy, security, consumer protection and communications now, working with industry and consumer groups to make sure we get this right ahead of the mass rollout.”

Please do not allow this misguided attempt to make me and many others ill again to continue. Your eyes are open, and the eyes of the world and of future generations are on you.

February 2013