Woman Files Claim Against City For $1.7 Billion Claiming Wireless Parking Meters Are Making Her Sick

Wireless signals are bouncing around us all day and all night — from mobile phones, Internet services and now in Santa Monica, Calif., new city parking meters. One woman who apparently is known for submitting detailed reports during public comment periods with the City Council claims all those wireless signals emitted from newfangled parking meters are making her ill — and she wants $1.7 billion for her health problems because of it. Plus another $1.7 million every month after that.

The Santa Monica Daily Press says she admits that it’s kind of a big sum.

“I know it seems a little big,” she said, “but they can’t do things that affect people’s health without their consent. I think that’s wrong.”

In her claim against City Hall, she says that radiation from the wireless signals is causing her ears to ring, giving her ear infections and a tightness on her neck. This all started happening in April, she says after the meters started popping up. She’s worried that the radiation might cause cancer.

So far, she’s the cheese standing alone in her complaints against the meters, said the city’s assistant finance director.

“The Wi-Fi is very low level and only communicates between the meter and the sensor, about 5 to 8 feet,” he wrote. It’s also not like the meters are constantly sending out wireless signals — they only activate when a person pays the meter or when cars pull up or away, he said.

“It’s the same as someone using a cell phone walking on the sidewalk,” he wrote. “The meters comply with all necessary regulations related to wireless communication.”

City Hall says the new technology makes it easier to park and find spots.

Despite the city’s insistence that the woman seeking billions is the only one to complain, at least formally, others in the community are worried about all the cell phone towers around the city, as well as meters that track energy in residences in real time used by Southern California Edison. A group of citizens are suing the company over the $$75 fee they have to pay to opt out of such wireless meters.

“They’re trying to charge people to not give them cancer and invade their homes,” said one of the group’s members.

Resident files $1.7B claim with City Hall [Santa Monica Daily Press]


Edit Your Comment

  1. wombats lives in [redacted] says:

    Once ebay quits selling the cures we posted yesterday, how will she get her medical care?

  2. Wonko the Sane says:

    Paying for parking makes me sick, can I join the lawsuit?

  3. Marlin says:


    • MeowMaximus says:

      And another stupid lawsuit from the barking moonbat brigade. I hope this gets laughed out of court, and the silly b*tch and her lawyer get heavily fined.

  4. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    Not commenting any the merits of the case itself, but I will comment on his statement:

    “It’s also not like the meters are constantly sending out wireless signals — they only activate when a person pays the meter or when cars pull up or away.”

    During business hours, they would collectively be sending out signals non-stop.

    • wombats lives in [redacted] says:

      With a radius of 5-8 feet.

      • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

        Presumably. There have been reports of individuals seemingly having harsh reactions to electronic signals and electromagnetic fields.

        I am not even going to attempt to begin that discussion or even touch on the evidence on either side of that debate.

        But giving her the benefit of the doubt for a moment, it’s perceivable that 5-8 feet of wireless connection isn’t the end of its effects on our environement.

        • That guy. says:

          Let’s even say 20 feet…where is this woman all day, in relation to these parking meters, that she can’t avoid being impacted by them?

        • Anne Marie says:

          “I am not even going to attempt to begin that discussion or even touch on the evidence on either side of that debate.”

          The (lack of) evidence is kind of the whole point here. Giving her the benefit of the doubt is acknowledging that she has real symptoms, not believing that the wifi has anything to do with them. You can’t just look at the case and say, “Well, ignoring all scientific evidence, let’s assume she can tell what causes her vague symptoms and discuss that premise.” That’s nonsensical.

          • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

            No, I’m trying to look at it from a perspective as if she wasn’t a crackpot.

            She is definitely not the only person to complain about electronics causing health problems. So I’m looking at it from the perspective that she is thinking, and from the perspective of how it would be if she was right.

            Bad science is one that says, “this violates our current beliefs, so we will are going to ignore it.”
            Good science is one that says, “this violates our current beliefs, so let’s see if our current beliefs are letigimately in question.”

            And before you respond with a retort, I’d like to point out that neither of us are qualified to state whether science has debunked this issue. That is precisely why I chose not to get into the debate. If you feel I’m wrong in that statement, please provide evidence that the ENTIRE scientific community is in agreement, not just one person. I can find one person to support any argument.

            • MrEvil says:

              I’m going with Occam’s razer on this one. Which is a more simple solution, that it’s all in her head (psychosomatic disorders are well documented) or that her symptoms are caused in her belief. Or that Electromagnetic radiation is in fact responsible in a way that defies all the knowledge we have on the effects of EM fields on living tissue.

              ATX Programmer is right, she’ll have to crawl in a hole and die to avoid any EM radiation. Every lifeform on planet Earth is BOMBARDED with it from our own sun plus all the other EM radiation that enters our solar system from outside our solar system.

              • Smiling says:

                Occam’s razor? If you used Occam’s razor for everything, no one would ever get a diagnosis for anything. Oh, you have a headache that hasn’t gone away for two weeks? Occam’s razor would dictate it’s probably all in your head.

                People told my mom’s family that they were imaging their symptoms after chemicals were dumped next to their place of business in the 1950’s. Two people who worked there died of a very rare form of leukemia and they were not related. Two died of brain tumors. I am pretty sure that the five people who worked there for a good portion of their lives all died of cancer, 4 of them at a fairly young age. Turns out, it was the chemicals, and the lawsuit that another business nearby filed years after the dumping, established that, and my mom’s family ended up getting a hefty out of court settlement.

                My point? Things may seem harmless until decades later when it comes to light that they will actually fock you up bad. Electromagnetic fields can do all kinds of shit to all kinds of things since the can effect things down to the molecular/atomic level. when you start applying forces down to the atomic level, I’m not sure you can rule anything out. Can you prove it? Probably not at this point. Can you disprove it? Absolutely not. Is it a possibility? Sure as shit is.

                • MaytagRepairman is stealing socks while fixing your dryer. says:

                  Your application of Occam’s razor is wrong.

                  • Cerne says:

                    It’s so wrong I don’t think you could call it an application. He’s trying to refute an entirely different theory he seems to have just invented.

                • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

                  Man, I thought I was going to get a lot of flame comments due to my own. I’m glad someone actually got it.

              • Smiling says:

                Also, your argument about things being bombarded is kind of a bad argument. You can’t really argue that because some from natural sources is fine, that an endless amount is also fine.What if our bodies are made to withstand a certain amount from the sun and natural sources? Go a little beyond that with something like the occasional use of a garage door opener and you are fine. Then, when you start piling it on, maybe the body says it is too much and it begins to exhibit negative symptoms. Cancer rates have gone up a great deal (anywhere from 20-55% depending on the group of people studied and the researchers) in the U.S. since technology has become more prevalent. How do you know it doesn’t have to do with electromagnetic fields? No one knows what it is from, but maybe we have crossed that threshold from safe amounts of electromagnetic radiation to amounts that are really hurting people, many of them silently. I’m not making a claim here, because I have no clue, but to assert that we don’t have some kind of safe threshold for that stuff is naive.

                • MaytagRepairman is stealing socks while fixing your dryer. says:

                  The signals coming from these meters is less than that of a garage door opener and orders of magnitude less than a speaker in a television, radio, or telephone. You have no concept of electrical engineering or biology. You just blab on and on about what you learned in a Philosophy class.

                  • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

                    Nothing you just said really refutes his argument that from a scientific perspective, we can’t say we “know” with any real certainty what’s going on.

                • Cerne says:

                  The only accurate comment you have made anywhere in this post is that you have no clue.

                  • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

                    Ah least he made an accurate one.

                    You said that like not knowing, or admitting that you don’t know, is somehow wrong.

            • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

              You know what, screw the retorts Anne Marie. That’s really not the point I was trying to make. I played into your hand; well done, madam.

              As I said, I was not interested in arguing the merits of health issues related to electro-magnetism or wireless signals.

        • AustinTXProgrammer says:

          If people are that sensitive they might as well crawl in a hole and die. We have so many wireless signals from TV, Radio, cell phones, microwave ovens, airport radar, plane radar, automatic doors, etc that there is no chances of escaping them. The parking meters aren’t even a rounding error in the equation.

          • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

            If people truly do have a sensitivity to electromagnetism, then all we are doing is weeding them out of the population.

            It’s cruel, but by raising people “immune” to such ailments and eliminating those not immune only helps to strengthen the species.

        • thedarkerside.to says:

          Could you at least provide some of the “evidence” that those people actually have a valid claim?

          A friend, who heavily listens to “Coast to Coast” told me in all seriousness recently that those new smart meters they are putting in here in BC are “constantly communicating by satellite”. I have worked briefly on the smart meters and understand the overall architecture and know this is utter BS, but if that is what people get “fed” by the “alternative media” no wonder we get people all huffy and puffy over it.

          But I digress, I’d just like you to link us to a few of these “facts” / “evidence” that these smart (parking) meters are actually causing measurable physical effects on people.

      • TerpBE says:

        I haven’t seen these meters, but I find it hard to believe that all of the meters are within 5-8 feet of a sensor. Meters themselves are further apart than that (assuming they’re along a roadway), so there would have to be a sensor for each meter . If you’re going to have a sensor for every meter, why not just integrate them with the meters themselves, so you don’t need to wireless communicate with another device?

        I think it’s more likely that the finance director is just a terrible judge of distance.

      • ldillon says:

        Like there is a way to stop a wireless signal from propagating beyond 5-8 feet ???

        • Smiling says:

          Their is a little elf inside telling it to stop at 5-8 feet. It’s going to get it’s ass in trouble if it goes beyond that. Have you no faith in wireless signal elves?

        • thedarkerside.to says:

          You can not exactly calculate it but by limiting the power output you can at least give a maximum range.

        • Jane_Gage says:

          There is such a way. His name is Cool Hand Luke, his game is decapitating these one-eyed bandits.

      • theamazingyeah says:

        I sit 5-8 feet from a wireless router all day because I work from home, 5 being at my desk, 8 being me rolling around out of boredom and trying to wheel my chair to the fridge. How is the WiFi in these meters different from the ones at home? And does she wear an aluminum foil hat?

  5. prismatist says:

    Is it this lady?

  6. umbriago says:

    Lucky, “claims” can be just rejected with the notation NUTJOB. It’s not like this is a lawsuit, though if it were, it would probably be handwritten.

    I had to go look up “she’s the cheese standing alone,” by the way, so I learned something today.

    • matlock expressway says:

      I think all frivolous lawsuits should end either in a mandatory psychological evaluation or a charge of some sort (e.g., contempt of court).

      • shepd says:

        We just need to bring the boy who cried wolf principle into courts. Rack up enough idiotic items like this and you will NEVER be allowed to use the court again.

        Of course, for criminal matters, you aren’t the one using the court, so it’s still A-OK.

  7. That guy. says:

    Doesn’t it being wireless open up the possiblity for scamming them (or “hacking” them)?

  8. milkcake says:

    If you don’t fit with the society, you kinda have to go… how about north korea? I hear it’s very wireless-free.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Actually they have some good technology. North Korea isn’t a nation incapable of obtaining high-quality living for its residents.

      They just don’t give it to every citizen.

      • Cerne says:

        High Quality living in North Korea equates to roughly American lower middle class college student in the 90’s.

    • Banished to the Corner says:

      Miramar (formerly Burma) is quite technology free.

      • prismatist says:

        You mean Myanmar. Miramar is where Top Gun was.

        • videoman says:

          I think Miramar has quite a bit of technology.

        • Banished to the Corner says:

          LOL, I realized that later…. “I was thinking, that’s not how you spell Myanmar ?!?!?”, but my spell checker didn’t catch it. Interestingly, my spell checker doesn’t like Myanmar – of course, it doesn’t like my last name either.

          Yup, Miramar is high tech – probably a bad place for this lady.
          Myanmar is quite low tech.

  9. EP2012 says:

    I don’t get it… is she sleeping next to one of these meters or she simply walks by them and has symptoms? I’d love to know the science behind this, since everything from to McDonald’s to hospitals are pushing out wireless signals and it would be hard to prove what’s causing her issues – it could be what she eats for all we know – or a delusion…

    • Smiling says:

      Maybe when you add the huge number of meters together that are emitting the signals, it pushed her body over its threshold for that kind of a thing. Other people could also be affected, but they won’t know until they are diagnosed with cancer in 30 years. Who knows? Certainly not you or me. Hell, even scientists don’t really know. To dismiss her claim with no proof to the contrary is no more illogical that her making the claim. No one knows what the human threshold for these fields are, but there is bound to be one. I am pretty sure that we can not stand an infinite amount of electromagnetic radiation to our bodies. Who are you to say that all of the new fields did not push her body over the edge? Just because we don’t **know** for sure/understand it doesn’t make her crazy for connecting her issues to the event of the new meters. To prove it, it would take years of exposing people to typical fields found in large cities like that. You would have to compare their levels of complaints to people who were never exposed, then filter out all of the other factors that could cause issues. Seems pretty impossible to prove with that scenario.

      • Megalomania says:

        You have an almost laughable lack of understanding of almost every aspect of the science related here, from biology to EM radiation to 802.11 protocol. Your comments are a stunning example of the prevalence of junk science, and the fundamental misunderstandings and almost willful ignorance of scientific principles that allows such idiotic beliefs to propagate.

        First, you have completely reversed the burden of proof in your analogy comparing this to proving whether god exists; the body of science states in this case that there are no effects; she is the one attempting to claim the existence of ‘god’ – in this case, that a phenomena hitherto unpredicted by known science is real and effects her specifically. Were she to claim that narrow beam transmissions from Alpha Centauri continuously tracked her and caused her problems, would you still claim that the burden is on science to debunk that claim? You do not get to redraw the fundamental precepts of our understanding with anecdotes and conjecture.

        You previously commented to express your disbelief that wireless signals could cease propagating after a set distance; we do not determine effective broadcast range by some kind of voodoo or magical assumptions, we use extremely well founded and tested science. Assuming they are correct in their statement about the effective broadcast range, after 8 feet, you would not be able to tell whether the radio is transmitting.

        I grant you that we cannot withstand an infinite amount of EM radiation. You, however, are missing a plethora of incredibly salient facts regarding how wifi radios relate to that. First, these devices are most likely in the 2.4GHz (unlicensed, or ISM) spectrum, and legally required to broadcast at no more than 30dBm (1W). Since they are engineered to have an effective range of 5-8 feet, it’s probably significantly less than that – someone else can work out their broadcast power if they feel like it. The power of transmitters in licensed bands is orders of magnitude higher; larger radio stations broadcast around 50,000W. Microwave ovens, incidentally, also use the 2.4GHz ISM band, and have a broadcast power of ~700W – poorly shielded units will give off, again, magnitudes more radiation than a wifi radio (a phenomenon that quite a few college students have noticed when their cheap microwave knocks their laptop off of wifi).

        You are also missing an extremely fundamental and important difference between non-ionizing and ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is capable of altering the atoms in your body (specifically, ionizing them, but that’s kind of a poor definition to give to someone who seems unaware of the concept), and non-ionizing – by definition – will not do so. Non-ionizing radiation can still effect you, but that is essentially limited to heating you (a la the aforementioned microwave oven).

        Incidentally, the “electrosensitivity” theory she is expounding has been thoroughly debunked, with science, by scientists. If you are unaware of how science works (and you are extremely unaware, just for the record), do look them up so you can get a general idea of how it works. Very little of it involves single data points suing for billions of dollars.

        There are many other things you have completely ignored or – more likely – are utterly unaware of in the first place; 802.11 protocol springs to mind with your separate theory that it’s the aggregate effect of many radios – but ultimately it comes down to this, and I’m only going to say this once so fucking listen closely:

        It is people like you, who proclaim “no one knows” while utterly lacking knowledge of scientific procedure or principle, that end up causing needless scares. It is people like you, who belittle known science while expounding junk theories, that end up giving scam artists an audience to defraud. People like you have blood on your hands. I doubt you are an HIV denier, a proponent of “alternative” medicine, or a vaccine denier, but it is the exact same attitude that causes leads to people attempting to treat HIV with vitamins, cancer with acupuncture, and to skip vaccination for their children. Providing any sort of support for this breed of crackpot theory only serves to keep people away from receiving actual help. If you are skeptical, run a new study. Perform a meta-analysis. Do not feed the delusions of others.

        • samandiriel says:
        • DrRonIsIn says:


        • Cerne says:

          That was beautiful. Thank you.

        • Lt. Coke says:

          You win all of the internets for the next six weeks good sir. Well done.

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          Do you have any links that someone could peruse regarding said scientific debunkment of said crackpot theory?

          Would love to peruse.

          • Megalomania says:

            certainly – my primary suggestion would be to read through http://iddd.de/umtsno/emfkrebs/rubin2005emf.pdf , a review of 31 double blind studies. It is somewhat dated, but I’m not aware of anything more recent that is as useful to look over. Somewhat unrelatedly, I apologize for the site it’s hosted on (I have no idea what it is, but the site itself certainly looks unreputable) – I was unable to find the full text posted on a site I’d be happier linking to, but you can find the abstract and whatnot at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15784787

            For a couple full texts of studies, I would refer you to:

            http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.8934 – researchers had subjects perform tasks and analyzed their performance under varying levels of EM radiation

            http://www.bmj.com/content/332/7546/886.full – the more commonly discussed (and easily replicable) study; researchers took ‘electrosensitives’ and control participants, and (among other data collected) asked them to determine whether a signal was present.

            Finally, I would refer you to Ben Goldacre (http://www.badscience.net); you can find a subset of his posts specifically relating to electrosensitivity through the tags, but the vast majority of his posts are well worth reading in their own right. As the name of the site implies, they predominantly focus on the misuse of science, and junk science/statistics in general. I would usually avoid linking a blog in this sort of situation, but you can review his credentials and work for yourself – plus he almost always quotes/links where necessary.

  10. BrownLeopard says:

    If she put her tinfoil hat back on the signals wouldn’t hit her brain.

    Although it would add some chlorine to the gene pool if she didn’t.

  11. josephpr says:

    1.7 billion sounds kinda high. Doesn’t she know she can wear the same tinfoil hat more than once?

  12. Lyn Torden says:

    This lady is making me sick.

  13. JJFIII says:

    $1.7 billion ? So prove you are worth that much. I hate to make her supposed illness a monetary issue, but suing for $1.7 BILLION made it that. Let’s assume for the sake of shits and giggles EVERYTHING she says is true. The parking signals ARE in fact causing her harm. There are tow parts to the claim. She must show the defendant CAUSED the damage, then she must prove her DAMAGES.. What is her yearly salary? Is she unable ot work because of it? What medical attention has she had and what did that cost? Unless she is an heir to Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, she will be hard pressed to prove she is worth that much. In fact, since this has not actually killed her, what would the value of her life be? Imagine a world where if a person had a slip and fall at your home and could sue you for $1.7 BILLION because of constant pain and suffering?
    If she really wants to get rid of these, her course of action is to file a motion for injunctive relief is she truly believes this is an issue. The courts will hear both sides. She could bring her “experts” in to stop the city from using the meters. This is just a delusional woman

  14. GearheadGeek says:

    I guess she decided it’s not original enough to be a crank about smartmeters in CA, so she’d go after parking meters and not have to share with a class and more lawyers for the settlement?

    I think it’s important that people who are genuinely harmed should be able to sue for redress. I think it’s equally important that frivolous shagwit hypochondriacs should have to pay court costs for bringing bullshit cases like this when they lose.

    • HogwartsProfessor says:

      What’s worse is when they win.

    • Fafaflunkie Plays His World's Smallest Violin For You says:

      I’d go one step further that that. Assuming some super-sleazy lawyer actually took on this woman’s case (pro bono or otherwise), and if it actually made it past discovery–which I would seriously doubt, but then again, it’s not like that couldn’t happen–if I were the judge presiding over this case, you wouldn’t believe the shitstorm I’d fathom.

      Firstly, I would cite both the plaintiff and her sleazy lawyer for criminal contempt of court for bringing up such a frivolous lawsuit, and stick them both in jail. Then disbar the lawyer once he serves his time. Then award all legal fees + other “you just wasted how much of their time?” damages to the City of Santa Monica, along with all other fees. Hell, if this were a jury trial, I’d award each of the jurors a hefty hunk of change for their actual/opportunity costs/time wasted.

      Even if those parking meters may affect the plaintiff’s health, there is no way, no how she would be even 0.1% close to able to justify such a damage claim ($1.7B+$1.7M/month? That’s like winning 30 Powerball jackpots!)

  15. lovemypets00 - You'll need to forgive me, my social filter has cracked. says:

    Dear Santa Monica,

    I understand the cell phone towers around your town are making people sick, possibly giving them cancer, and emitting signals that invade your resident’s homes.

    In that light, could you please send one of the towers to my neighborhood in Pennsylvania? I would very much appreciate the cell phone signal invasion, as would many of my neighbors. Plus, we rural people are pretty sturdy, so I’m fairly sure a few more signals from a cell tower won’t kill us (after all, we even use wireless modems!).

    Thanks so much,


    ps – I promise I won’t sue!

    • RandomLetters says:

      pps – Please make it one of those fancy 4G ones.

    • oldwiz65 says:

      We could use more of those dangerous towers here too. the zoning laws and NIMBY people make getting another cell tower about as difficult as opening a p**n theater or s*x shop.

  16. demeteloaf says:

    Put her in a faraday cage with one of the parking meters…

    $20 says she can’t do better than flipping a coin at guessing whether the thing is even on or not.

  17. Anne Marie says:

    “In her claim against City Hall, she says that radiation from the wireless signals is causing her ears to ring, giving her ear infections and a tightness on her neck. This all started happening in April, she says after the meters started popping up.”

    Sounds like enough evidence to go in the medical advice post earlier today…

  18. Danno23 says:

    They will probably settle out of court for a billion.

  19. conscious says:

    Someone should ask her if she has either a radio or a microwave in her home and then ban her from these meetings.

  20. oldwiz65 says:

    She desperately needs a tinfoil hat. Or maybe she should move into an enormous house sized faraday cage.

  21. frodolives35 says:

    I think the city should send in the secret task force and just implant more tin foil in her head or use the flashy thing and make her forget.

  22. alexwade says:

    Reminds me of a news story I read about a long time ago (don’t have a link) where people where complaining that the new cell tower was causing health problems and when the news investigated, the tower wasn’t even on yet.

    • Smiling says:

      Just because a few people are affected by the placebo affect, doesn’t mean that all complaints are null and void.

      • thedarkerside.to says:

        So, where’s the scientific evidence for it? It’s not like we are new to this whole EM thing.

        • Smiling says:

          Where is the scientific evidence that it doesn’t cause problems? If you are so sure it doesn’t cause problems, let some scientist construct the biggest field known to man around your house. If you are so sure about its safety, you should be okay with that.
          Asking for proof that there is a problem versus me asking for proof there isn’t, is like the God argument. I can’t prove God exists, and you can’t prove God doesn’t. It’s a silly argument. I am not arguing that EMF’s are a problem. But, I am also not arguing that they are not a problem. You could call be agnostic in that argument. I am just asserting that failure to prove something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I think it is foolish to make fun of her belief that an overload of EMF’s are causing her problems. It is, after all, a possibility. No one knows for sure.

          • samandiriel says:

            That’s the whole underlying assumption of science, actually – that no one knows for sure. All we have are ideas that have worked well to date. Insisting that “no one knows for sure” demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how science and the scientific process works.

            That being said, there are various levels of confidence regarding certain ideas, given previous experiments and the length of time a proposition has withstood challenges (eg, theories of gravity, evolution, etc). Which usually means that there is a point at which investigating counter claims because moot. Sometimes rumour mongers manage to whomp up enough public furor via the same sort of lack of understanding you’re demonstrating to force more testing regardless – for instance, in the case of vaccines causing autism.

            One of those ideas is that the vast majority of people are not negatively affected biologically by the current levels of urban EMF is currently supported by the available research. While by no means as well established as gravity or evolution, it’s still a well researched area with oodles of time and money spent on studies and guidelines for public health.

  23. ldillon says:

    While I don’t believe that cell phones pose a significant health risk to humans, it’s not unprecedented for a new technology or drug to have harmful effects that don’t show up for years. Many products once thought safe are now restricted or banned outright.

    The problem here is that the people telling us cell phones are safe are usually those who have a financial interest in cell phones. Kinda like the tobacco companies saying that cigarettes don’t cause cancer (cough, cough).

    Now, this doesn’t automatically invalidate the phone lobby argument, but neither does being a crack-pot automatically make the lady’s opinion on cell phones invalid.

    • shufflemoomin says:

      I’m beyond certain that you’ve done no research on the studies done on idiots like this. It’s been proven conclusively to be psychological, even to the point of these idiots complaining of symptoms from wifi signals when they’ve been lied to that any even exist. Morons, the lot of them.

      • Smiling says:

        You are asserting that because some people have found to be idiots, that all people claiming this are idiots? Really? Have you never taken a logic class, because that is extremely poor reasoning on your part. I am beyond certain that it would be very difficult to prove whether high levels of electromagnetic radiation over long periods have negative effects. Her body may have reached its threshold and the meters pushed her over. There are a lot of the meters. Who are you to say they are not affecting her?? Do you know what the human threshold is for EMF’s? Yes, it is douchey for her to sue for that much money. I don’t even think she should sue at all because she has no proof of her claim. But lack of proof doesn’t mean she is wrong. It would truly be impossible to prove her claim was wrong or right because there are so many other factors influencing our biological functions.

        • code65536 says:

          I’m usually not this blunt, but you have pushed me over the edge.

          You, sir, are an idiot.

          Can you prove that there isn’t a little teapot floating in the asteroid belt? No; looking for something that small in an area that large and that far away is for all intents and purposes impossible. Okay, fine, we can’t prove that it doesn’t exist, but the evidence strongly, strongly suggests (to the point that, for practical intents and purposes, it’s no different from proven) that one doesn’t exist.

          Similarly, the evidence here says that she’s a crackpot. Study after study have shown no link between EM radiation and health problems. The fact that there are much stronger sources of EM radiation all around us (and no, EM radiation is EM radiation, there is no fracking difference between “natural” and “man-made”) that don’t seem to affect these EM-sensitive crackpots (because apparently, they are sensitive only to sources that they are consciously aware of… hmm). Oh, and there’s the little problem that if these radio waves could have an effect on her, then that would mean that our very understanding of EM waves (which IS supported by decades of evidence) is apparently wrong.

          Proof is ridiculous. Outside of mathematics, there is no absolute proof of anything in the real world, and so the “there is no proof” argument can be conjured up and misused for just about anything. There are mountains and mountains of evidence against her and her ilk. And the evidence from these sorts of people have repeatedly been debunked when put through controlled studies (my favorite is the one where scientists said that a transmitter was on when it really wasn’t and that it was off when it was really on, and found that the reactions from a group of EM-sensitive subjects tracked what was told to them, not what the actual on/off state was).

          Science. It works, bitches.

        • shufflemoomin says:

          Oh, man. This really cheered up my morning. You should be on TV with that act. Fantastic. You’re also a f**king idiot, but an entertaining idiot, I’ll give you that.

  24. ironflange says:

    You know what’s really sad? She will probably have no trouble whatsoever finding a lawyer willing to take her case.

  25. shufflemoomin says:

    This is what happens when stupidity, lack of education and greediness meet in large amounts.

  26. Leohat says:

    Ahhh. The stupid, it burns.
    I’m getting all stabby due to the stupid today.
    I give up. I’m gonna go knit a hat

  27. Press1forDialTone says:

    If we just humor her and wait, the aliens will come back and
    take her -again- to the planet Blazpot and then her neck will
    really get tight.

  28. cspschofield says:

    What I want to know is, what the hell makes this nitwit think her life is worth one of the monthly payments she is demanding, much less the lump sum?

    • Smiling says:

      This is my Issue with her. I have an issue with her suing the city and suing them for so much. I don’t think the city has any obligation to limit the EMF’s until there is more info on what the human threshold is. Until harm is proven and they violate proven standard levels, I don’t see how they are responsible for her body maybe (or maybe not) reaching the end of its tolerance level. I think it is irrelevant whether or not the radiation is actually causing harm because it can’t be proven of disproven on any individual at this point. People like her are leaches. Suing the city is actually suing the taxpayers, and unless you have really been damaged by negligence or intentional harm in a way you can prove, you are leeching off of the rest of the cities population.

  29. hoopz says:

    I’m an electrical engineer. There is really only one thing you need to know about this issue: wifi is extremely low power. Broadcast tv/radio, cellphones, cordless phones, walkie talkies, ambulance and police radios, etc…. they all broadcast at levels hundreds or thousands of times stronger, and have done so for decades. So if EM waves like wifi were making people sick, we would have been seeing much stronger effects for decades already.

    Plus, there was already a case in the UK where parents were claiming a school’s wifi was making children sick. After weeks of complaints and finger pointing, the school administration revealed they had turned off the wifi weeks ago, and there was no noticeable change in complaints. People suffer random illnesses all the time, and find incorrect causes all the time.

    If people really suffered from ‘wifi illness’, it would be trivial to discover in a double blind study. So far, there is no evidence that this is real.

  30. RxDude says:

    Thank you for taking the time to type what I was thinking, but in a much more polite and detailed manner.

  31. Rob says:

    There is a big controversy going on in New Haven, CT about these types of meters. When the driver that was parked at one pulls away, any time remaining resets to zero. Drivers that piggy backed onto any remaining time they used to get from the mechanical meters are not happy.

    • cactus jack says:

      People who pay nothing and expect to receive a service someone else paid for get angry. Seems easy to ignore.

  32. PsiCop says:

    There’s little dispute that electrosensitives are experiencing real problems. What has not yet been demonstrated, is that wifi … or any other form of EMF … is causing them.

    Of course, that doesn’t mean she can’t win at trial. If this case gets to a jury, it’s quite possible they’ll be sympathetic to her and return a verdict in her favor, despite the fact that science has yet to show any causality between the electrosensitives’ symptoms and EMF. If there are juries dumb enough to acquit O.J. Simpson and Casey Anthony, then she just might be awarded her billions.

  33. oldwiz65 says:

    I’m just waiting for the following claims to show up:
    — wi-fi made my wife pregnant, the city must support the child until he/she/it is 21.
    — wi-fi made me impotent.
    — wi-fi killed my unborn child.
    — wi-fi caused my cat to die.
    — wi-fi caused me to gain 300 pounds.

  34. jacobs cows says:

    There is a lunatic born every minute.

  35. Moo Strength says:

    Yea, the sun is causing me to have a risk of skin cancer, because the ozone layer has become thinner and not capable of blocking all those harmful ways. I had hoped that the US Government would do the right thing and build huge roof’s that cover everywhere that I go with giant UV shielding material, so even though my claim is seen as patently absurd, I’m going to insist on blaming them for not doing the right thing here for the past 80 years or so……

    People shouldn’t have to put up with the sun causing them cancer. Because the government themselves knowingly allowed technology and businesses to function that eventually led to the ozone layer being depleted, it’s all their fault. Obviously I can’t stay in my house all the time. And frankly I never consented to allowing all those companies from producing things that would cause the ozone layer to be depleted, and that’s wrong.

    So I am suing everyone in the government as well as every company that has remotely had anything to do with products that when used deplete the ozone layer. I think I’m being entirely fair if I only ask for 1 trillion dollars from each company for each day of my life that they have allowed this to happen, because I think each day of life for me is worth about a trillion dollars in money really, and so I should be paid for all the additional days I won’t get to experience since I will die much sooner from the cancer.

  36. Mephron says:


    Long story short: nothing proven about it, people who claim to be sensitive have not been able to prove the sensitivity, reports of health issues have been self-reported without documentation. There’s no current science that backs up her complaints.

  37. DrPizza says:

    Utter rubbish. There is absolutely no known mechanism by which these meters can cause cancer or anything else. This has been established for over 100 years. Is that to say we know everything? No, it isn’t. There could be “something else.” However, since most people are scientifically illiterate, I’ll use an analogy: discovering this “something else” would be akin to discovering that “hey, we’re wrong about the shape of the Earth. Actually, it’s shaped more like an inside out donut.”

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      100 years, you say?

      We’ve been doing research on EM raditation for 100 years? On WI-Fi signals for 100 years?

      100 years you say?

      • wombats lives in [redacted] says:

        EM Radiation, yes, actually much longer.

        Wifi, no, it’s a technology which uses radio frequency which has been in a used and studied range for quite some time though.

        Additionally the plaintiffs claims are absurd based on our current knowledge and understanding of the technology. Unless she has discovered via scientific process proof then she has no case.

  38. Obtruder says:

    I would think more than just her would be affected…

    Maybe see a doctor and see if they can clear up that bad case of attentionwhoreleosis

  39. baristabrawl says:

    It’s California. Does anyone really care about the lack of accountability there? Anyplace that would elect Arnold Schwartzeneger governor more than once gets what they deserve.