All FCC comments · page 111

2,415 public comments, newest first, 20 per page. Keep scrolling to load more.

#2201I am pleased that the FCC is reopening the record on the health and environmental impacts from RF radiati…by Bonni McKeown » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Towers, antennas & siting: Neighborhoods now seem to be full of 5G cell towers and nobody knows what effect all this radiation has on human bodies and on the environment.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: Also we don't know how the constant presence of our cell phones and routers is affecting us because radiation testing procedures for cell phones and other portable wireless devices has not been updated.
  • Wildlife & environment: Neighborhoods now seem to be full of 5G cell towers and nobody knows what effect all this radiation has on human bodies and on the environment.
  • Exposure limits & testing: Also we don't know how the constant presence of our cell phones and routers is affecting us because radiation testing procedures for cell phones and other portable wireless devices has not been updated.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: I encourage the FCC to sincerely and thoroughly undertake these studies.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077308

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077308

I am pleased that the FCC is reopening the record on the health and environmental impacts from RF radiation exposure. Neighborhoods now seem to be full of 5G cell towers and nobody knows what effect all this radiation has on human bodies and on the environment. Also we don't know how the constant presence of our cell phones and routers is affecting us because radiation testing procedures for cell phones and other portable wireless devices has not been updated. I wonder if some of the mental confusion I've experienced lately can be attributed to having these devices around me so many hours each day. I encourage the FCC to sincerely and thoroughly undertake these studies.

#2202I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…by Lorraine Palacios » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Sensitivity & health experiences: I will get headaches and migraines and feel awful in a short time and have to leave the area I am in.
  • Cancer & tumors: The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer.
  • Children, schools & development: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: This issue matters to me personally because: I can not be anywhere where there are cell towers nearby or even around people carrying cell phones.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Wildlife & environment: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Exposure limits & testing: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077307 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077307 I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: I can not be anywhere where there are cell towers nearby or even around people carrying cell phones. There is definitely a health affect from the radiation being emitted from all these devices. I will get headaches and migraines and feel awful in a short time and have to leave the area I am in. If I see a cell tower overlooking a main street when I am on vacation, I won't even attempt to go shopping on the street. It is ridiculous how cell towers are put right where people want to be. I have even seen them right on school grounds. There needs to be good regulations on cell towers because they are making…

Read the full comment →

#2203i have had the following symptoms from combinations and interactions of emf pollution and vaccine sheddin…by beverly j welbourne » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Sensitivity & health experiences: i have had the following symptoms from combinations and interactions of emf pollution and vaccine shedding: hemorrhage from ears, nose, rectum, vagina, bladder ocular hemorrhage, a very painful condition which affected my vision, and from which I, have not yet fully recovered throat swelling or irritation, sore throat headaches, commonly occipital, parietal, and frontal brain fog, confusion, slow thinking, transient aphasia disorientation in space or time, sometimes leading to falls or minor injury; sore, blocked meridians indications of cerebellar interference such as uncoordination of left a
  • Sleep & neurological concerns: i have had the following symptoms from combinations and interactions of emf pollution and vaccine shedding: hemorrhage from ears, nose, rectum, vagina, bladder ocular hemorrhage, a very painful condition which affected my vision, and from which I, have not yet fully recovered throat swelling or irritation, sore throat headaches, commonly occipital, parietal, and frontal brain fog, confusion, slow thinking, transient aphasia disorientation in space or time, sometimes leading to falls or minor injury; sore, blocked meridians indications of cerebellar interference such as uncoordination of left a
  • Biological mechanisms & metabolism: these have happened repeatedly and still happen to this day; grief over loss of connection to soulful companions; concern of great potential for disease due to dna damage; existential disquietude over potential loss of identity due to dna degradation; economic hardship due to inability to serve vaccinated persons in capacity of touch-related assistance; that is, i, develop debilitating symptoms upon touching a vaccinated person, and am unable to continue; i do and have never had a mobile phone, as i find it harmful to touch one (if it is on).
  • Towers, antennas & siting: i have myself observed with a small rf meter, the interaction between signals from covid injected persons and wi fi, cell towers, mobile phones; i do assert that this phenomenon exists.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: capacity of touch-related assistance; that is, i, develop debilitating symptoms upon touching a vaccinated person, and am unable to continue; i do and have never had a mobile phone, as i find it harmful to touch one (if it is on).
  • Wired connections & alternatives: here is my landline number: 513 489 9777; i invite a phonecall.
  • Wildlife & environment: all of these devices must be removed from the environment altogether.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: i am available and would be happy to testify at court, provided that i will not be irradiated at the courthouse, as this is harmful.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077304 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077304 i have had the following symptoms from combinations and interactions of emf pollution and vaccine shedding: hemorrhage from ears, nose, rectum, vagina, bladder ocular hemorrhage, a very painful condition which affected my vision, and from which I, have not yet fully recovered throat swelling or irritation, sore throat headaches, commonly occipital, parietal, and frontal brain fog, confusion, slow thinking, transient aphasia disorientation in space or time, sometimes leading to falls or minor injury; sore, blocked meridians indications of cerebellar interference such as uncoordination of left and right or arms and legs sinus irritation, pain, congestion, or pressure as though a cold is coming on, with sneezing, cough, and runny nose bruising on hands or arms, usually from directly touching the skin of an injected person, occasionally from proximity alone pressure or pain in ears, temporary dulling of hearing tinnitus, frequently sudden-onset upon exposure pain in appendix muscular cramps in legs or feet chest tightness, spasm, pain; difficult to inhale; poor perfusion while breathing hard nausea heart spasm and pain; sometimes feels as though my heart is struggling to beat, or jumping out of my chest tachycardia, usually briefly, upon initial contact extended periods of elevated heart rate, even while lying down vertigo abdominal spasm or pain spasm or aching in spleen diarrhea lienteric stool ovaritis, sudden sharp pain or aching of ovaries, or generalized pelvic pain, pelvic inflammation bladder spasm, urgency to urinate, similar to UTI symptoms anxiety insomnia mood swings brain fog feeling dazed malaise shortness of breath sudden-onset weakness fatigue, frequently sudden-onset visual blurring or distortion conjunctivitis rashes, often continuing for several days after exposure cysts, developing the day following exposure, slow to resolve sudden-onset desire to flee feeling of dread: oh, no, i, feel those same toxins again! feeling of panic or fear at the strong possibility that I’m getting yet another headache, and my breathing is being inhibited—again—by these same, now-familiar toxins kidney pain…

Read the full comment →

#2204I have been aware of the fields and energies relating to EMF for years and taken evasive action where pos…by Steven and Monica Ferry » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077303

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077303

I have been aware of the fields and energies relating to EMF for years and taken evasive action where possible, including spending thousands of dollars on neutralizing technologies that are not up to the task. We moved into a condo in TN and later saw a mast .3 miles away by I-40. The number of antenna is now up to about 20, up from about 4. At the same time, the number of masts within a 3 mile radius is about 15. During this time, I have perceived a rapid deterioration in my ability to focus, and the beginnings of Parkinsons, especially shaking hands. I have used tri-meters to measure the EMF. We had to leave our condo in Pinellas, FL because the readings were so high as a result of having average 200 towers in a 3 mile radius. Sleep is fitful. When we go to a friend in the mountains of North Carolina, we sleep very well because there are no towers nearby.

#2205I am writing as a private citizen regarding ET Docket No. 13-84 and the Commission's response to the D.C.…by Vasco Valov » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Cancer & tumors: The court remanded for the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer, and directed it specifically to address its testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices, the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments since the guidelines were last updated, and environmental effects.
  • Children, schools & development: The court remanded for the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer, and directed it specifically to address its testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices, the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments since the guidelines were last updated, and environmental effects.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: The court remanded for the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer, and directed it specifically to address its testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices, the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments since the guidelines were last updated, and environmental effects.
  • Exposure limits & testing: The court remanded for the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer, and directed it specifically to address its testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices, the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments since the guidelines were last updated, and environmental effects.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: Circuit's remand in Environmental Health Trust v.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: The court remanded for the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer, and directed it specifically to address its testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices, the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments since the guidelines were last updated, and environmental effects.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077302 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077302 I am writing as a private citizen regarding ET Docket No. 13-84 and the Commission's response to the D.C. Circuit's remand in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, No. 20-1025 (D.C. Cir. 2021). The court remanded for the Commission to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer, and directed it specifically to address its testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices, the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments since the guidelines were last updated, and environmental effects. That mandate issued in October 2021. Nearly five years passed before this record was reopened. The delay is itself part of what the Commission should account for. The scale of what is being decided. The guidelines at issue were set in 1996. In the three decades since, wireless exposure has gone from occasional and voluntary to continuous, ambient, and involuntary. Nearly every person in the country is now exposed, in every room they occupy, from birth, with no practical ability to opt out. Because FCC limits and FCC device certification shape international practice and because US-certified handsets are sold worldwide, the reasoning the Commission puts on this record does not stay domestic. The Commission is not choosing between acting and waiting. The exposure is already universal and expands by default while the question remains open. Continuing without a reasoned explanation is itself a decision, and it is the one the court found inadequate. On children, specifically. This is where the Commission's position is weakest, and where the consequences of being wrong are least recoverable. SAR compliance testing relies on a standardized head phantom derived from adult male anthropometry. Children differ in head size, skull thickness, tissue dielectric properties, and the proximity of developing tissue to the device. The Commission has not explained why a model built on adults adequately represents them. More…

Read the full comment →

#2206Attachment-only filingby Edie freitas » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077301

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077301

Official documents · 1

Documents open from the official FCC ECFS record. Their contents are not part of the topic matching.

#2207Regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radi…by Karen Mangini » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Cancer & tumors: The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer.
  • Children, schools & development: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: I can't have Wi-Fi on my computer because, again, it affects my physical well-being.
  • Wired connections & alternatives: I have to use my landline for communication.
  • Wildlife & environment: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Exposure limits & testing: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077300

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077300

Regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. This issue matters to me personally because I am negatively physically affected by RF radiation exposure and microwave radiation. I have to use my landline for communication. I will NOT give up my landline. I can't have Wi-Fi on my computer because, again, it affects my physical well-being. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court.

#2208Attachment-only filingby Judith Hendin » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077299

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077299

Official documents · 1

Documents open from the official FCC ECFS record. Their contents are not part of the topic matching.

#2209I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…by Brian R Karvelas, M.D. » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Sleep & neurological concerns: These reported health effects have involved multisystem illnesses including neurological, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and immunological.
  • Cancer & tumors: The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer.
  • Children, schools & development: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Wildlife & environment: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Exposure limits & testing: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077298 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077298 I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: As a multispecialty board-certified physician with over 30 years of experience in the practice of medicine, I have consulted with and treated numerous patients who have reported significant health effects from exposure to RF radiation resulting from the use of cell phones or other wireless devices. These reported health effects have involved multisystem illnesses including neurological, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and immunological. In a more personal manner, my wife has suffered serious ill health effects due to RF radiation exposure resulting from the use of a cell phone. The…

Read the full comment →

#2210I was one of the first cell phone users, back around 1997, and used the device always, even when it was h…by W. Raebeck » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Cancer & tumors: But over the years, it only grew into full-on skin cancer.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: I was one of the first cell phone users, back around 1997, and used the device always, even when it was huge and required an antenna.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: I was one of the first cell phone users, back around 1997, and used the device always, even when it was huge and required an antenna.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077297

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077297

I was one of the first cell phone users, back around 1997, and used the device always, even when it was huge and required an antenna. And for the first 20 years, I held it right up against my ear. I developed a sore on my ear back around 2005 or so, that wouldn't heal. I never wanted surgery because I knew they'd take away part of my ear. But over the years, it only grew into full-on skin cancer. I always hoped I could cure or reverse it…but it became a permanent, painful, open sore. At this point, most of my ear is gone, and my hearing is diminishing on that side. I'm 76 and otherwise perfectly active and healthy. There is NO QUESTION that cell phone radiation caused skin cancer in my ear. And I'm glad someone is finally looking into this terrible problem that NO ONE takes seriously.

#2211I would like to say that I read different publications and I watched videos about EMF and I am very conce…by Petronela Antohi » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Sleep & neurological concerns: I also read that it causes thinning of the cerebral cortex and dementia , increases risk of neurodegenerative disorders 3 times and decreases the attention span .
  • Cancer & tumors: I watched some scientists talking that this radiation breaks down the DNA and it causes cancer .My best friend who was a doctor she used to have her cell phone in the pocket ( left chest pocket ) and she developed left breast cancer and died of it.
  • Children, schools & development: I read about EMF that it is way above the safety limit and that Children are more sensitive to it because their skull is not ossified until later.
  • Biological mechanisms & metabolism: I watched some scientists talking that this radiation breaks down the DNA and it causes cancer .My best friend who was a doctor she used to have her cell phone in the pocket ( left chest pocket ) and she developed left breast cancer and died of it.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: I watched some scientists talking that this radiation breaks down the DNA and it causes cancer .My best friend who was a doctor she used to have her cell phone in the pocket ( left chest pocket ) and she developed left breast cancer and died of it.
  • Exposure limits & testing: I read about EMF that it is way above the safety limit and that Children are more sensitive to it because their skull is not ossified until later.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077296

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077296

I would like to say that I read different publications and I watched videos about EMF and I am very concerned about it. I watched some scientists talking that this radiation breaks down the DNA and it causes cancer .My best friend who was a doctor she used to have her cell phone in the pocket ( left chest pocket ) and she developed left breast cancer and died of it. I also read that it causes thinning of the cerebral cortex and dementia , increases risk of neurodegenerative disorders 3 times and decreases the attention span . I also find myself many times I am kind of scattered. It definitely affected my eyes , I had a very good vision and now my eyes are not good anymore . I read the emf has the same radiation as the microwave and than I am thinking wow , Am I microwaveing my eyes !Since 30 Y ago I heard that Microwave is not good because it produces free radicals , so I never used it to heat the food or anything . Than some PHDs told me that it decreases your dopamine and it causes addiction . I read about EMF that it is way above the safety limit and that Children are more sensitive to it because their skull is not ossified until later. I can not imagine the horror of having this cells and tablets in the hands of the little children when they blind them and thin their cortex , or give them cancer and also sterility and decreases their attention span. Also I heard it gives brain cancer if kept near the temple when talking on the phone . The wireless headphones are very dangerous because to much EMF to the brain . Than everyone is talking about nanotechnology in vaccines and in Pepsi and Coca Cola and that this interact with EMF and connect us to internet which has the same brain wave as the brain and will hijaack our independent thinking and individuality and our sense of self. I think that regulating the emf exposure and this devices would be of great benefit for the children with are our future and for all the people overall.We need children that are smart and emotionally and physically healthy.

#2212PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THE D.C. CIRCUIT REMAND ON RF RADIATION EXPOSURE GUIDELINES I am submitting this…by James Geddes » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Sensitivity & health experiences: Why This Issue Matters Personally In my day-to-day work and personal life, I regularly interact with individuals, families, and chronically ill patients who report debilitating sensitivities and symptom flares when exposed to ambient, near-field, and cumulative wireless radiation.
  • Sleep & neurological concerns: From headaches, brain fog, and severe sleep disruptions to heightened biological stress responses, these experiences are real, observable, and disruptive to daily living.
  • Cancer & tumors: The Court made it abundantly clear that the FCC failed to establish that its 1996 guidelines adequately protect against non-cancer health effects, cumulative long-term exposures, vulnerability in developing children, and impacts on wildlife and the environment.
  • Children, schools & development: The Court made it abundantly clear that the FCC failed to establish that its 1996 guidelines adequately protect against non-cancer health effects, cumulative long-term exposures, vulnerability in developing children, and impacts on wildlife and the environment.
  • Disability, access & daily life: Modern life has created an unprecedented environmental shift: citizens no longer experience single, isolated RF exposures.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: Instead, we are subjected to a continuous, overlapping blanket of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from modern cell phones held directly against the body, high-output Wi-Fi routers operating 24/7 in homes and schools, smart utility meters, and an accelerating density of small-cell infrastructure placed within feet of bedroom windows.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: Instead, we are subjected to a continuous, overlapping blanket of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from modern cell phones held directly against the body, high-output Wi-Fi routers operating 24/7 in homes and schools, smart utility meters, and an accelerating density of small-cell infrastructure placed within feet of bedroom windows.
  • Wired connections & alternatives: To achieve even a baseline level of comfort and restorative sleep, an increasing number of people are forced to take extraordinary measures—relying on RF shielding fabrics, hardwired Ethernet connections, and physical barriers just to reduce ambient field exposure in their own living spaces.
  • Wildlife & environment: The Court made it abundantly clear that the FCC failed to establish that its 1996 guidelines adequately protect against non-cancer health effects, cumulative long-term exposures, vulnerability in developing children, and impacts on wildlife and the environment.
  • Exposure limits & testing: CIRCUIT REMAND ON RF RADIATION EXPOSURE GUIDELINES I am submitting this comment in direct response to the remand ordered by the U.S.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: CIRCUIT REMAND ON RF RADIATION EXPOSURE GUIDELINES I am submitting this comment in direct response to the remand ordered by the U.S.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: The Court made it abundantly clear that the FCC failed to establish that its 1996 guidelines adequately protect against non-cancer health effects, cumulative long-term exposures, vulnerability in developing children, and impacts on wildlife and the environment.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077295 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077295 PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THE D.C. CIRCUIT REMAND ON RF RADIATION EXPOSURE GUIDELINES I am submitting this comment in direct response to the remand ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which mandated that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) provide a reasoned explanation for maintaining its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court made it abundantly clear that the FCC failed to establish that its 1996 guidelines adequately protect against non-cancer health effects, cumulative long-term exposures, vulnerability in developing children, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. As a communications regulator rather than a biomedical or health agency, the FCC cannot continue to dismiss peer-reviewed scientific evidence and real-world human experience while clinging to obsolete, thermal-only models. Why This Issue Matters Personally In my day-to-day work and personal life, I regularly interact with individuals, families, and chronically ill patients who report debilitating sensitivities and symptom flares when exposed to ambient, near-field, and cumulative wireless radiation. From headaches, brain fog, and severe sleep disruptions to heightened biological stress responses, these experiences are real, observable, and disruptive to daily living. Modern life has created an unprecedented environmental shift: citizens no longer experience single, isolated RF exposures. Instead, we are subjected to a continuous, overlapping blanket of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from modern cell phones held directly against the body, high-output Wi-Fi routers operating 24/7 in homes and schools, smart utility meters, and an accelerating density of small-cell infrastructure placed within feet of bedroom windows. To achieve even a baseline level of comfort and restorative sleep, an increasing number of people are forced to take extraordinary measures—relying on RF shielding fabrics, hardwired Ethernet connections, and physical barriers just to reduce ambient field exposure in their own living spaces. When individuals consistently experience tangible relief and…

Read the full comment →

#2213I get rashes, break outs, immune crashes, anxiety, panic attacks,... all while being a teacher with WIFI …by JACQUELINE WALBURN » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077294

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077294

I get rashes, break outs, immune crashes, anxiety, panic attacks,... all while being a teacher with WIFI in my room. Most of it went away when I unplugged it. Now, I have my home WIFI router on a timer to turn off at night as it disrupts my sleep otherwise.

#2214We urge the FCC to comprehensively study and report on the health and environmental impacts of wireless r…by Mark Matta » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Children, schools & development: We urge the FCC to comprehensively study and report on the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation (especially on children) and we OPPOSE wireless towers and hotspots being constructed/ installed in residential areas.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: We urge the FCC to comprehensively study and report on the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation (especially on children) and we OPPOSE wireless towers and hotspots being constructed/ installed in residential areas.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: We urge the FCC to comprehensively study and report on the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation (especially on children) and we OPPOSE wireless towers and hotspots being constructed/ installed in residential areas.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077293

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077293

We urge the FCC to comprehensively study and report on the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation (especially on children) and we OPPOSE wireless towers and hotspots being constructed/ installed in residential areas. Thank you...

#2215I’m grateful to have an opportunity to express my concern about radiation from cell towers and all 5G tec…by Diane Tetrault » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077292

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077292

I’m grateful to have an opportunity to express my concern about radiation from cell towers and all 5G technology. I’m experiencing an inflammatory condition, causing rashes and neurological damage. I’m in the care of a chiropractor, a physical therapist, and several other healthcare providers and have been for several years since moving into the city of Montpelier from a rural town.

#2216Attachment-only filingby Kathy Veon » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077291

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077291

Official documents · 2

Documents open from the official FCC ECFS record. Their contents are not part of the topic matching.

#2217I want the FCC to investigate further regarding the harmful effects of radio frequencies associated with …by Joanie McCann » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Towers, antennas & siting: I want the FCC to investigate further regarding the harmful effects of radio frequencies associated with cell towers, cell phones and other devices.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: I want the FCC to investigate further regarding the harmful effects of radio frequencies associated with cell towers, cell phones and other devices.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077290

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077290

I want the FCC to investigate further regarding the harmful effects of radio frequencies associated with cell towers, cell phones and other devices.

#2218I think all of us should be wary of the radiation emitted by cell towers, smart meters, WiFi Routers, and…by frank ingoglia » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • E-Rate & school connectivity: Similarly, I cannot speak with my cellphone next to my head for I feel it disturbs or disrupts my brain: there is a palpable sensation of heat generated by the phone.
  • Sensitivity & health experiences: This is subjective, but I also feel great discomfort with the WiFi on; cannot sleep properly; I have also noticed an increase of rheumatic pain, unusual agitation in domestic animals, and so forth.
  • Sleep & neurological concerns: This is subjective, but I also feel great discomfort with the WiFi on; cannot sleep properly; I have also noticed an increase of rheumatic pain, unusual agitation in domestic animals, and so forth.
  • Biological mechanisms & metabolism: I need not add that there is an increase in discomfort and most probably, multi-cellular damage, with the increase of 4G to 5G, and I can only imagine the horrors if 6G is introduced.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: I think all of us should be wary of the radiation emitted by cell towers, smart meters, WiFi Routers, and similar contraptions.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: I think all of us should be wary of the radiation emitted by cell towers, smart meters, WiFi Routers, and similar contraptions.
  • Wildlife & environment: I think it is impossible to escape these radionic frequencies nowadays; but something probably can be developed to mitigate their deleterious impacts on biological life: plants, animals, humans.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077289

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077289

I think all of us should be wary of the radiation emitted by cell towers, smart meters, WiFi Routers, and similar contraptions. My personal experience with Wi-Fi in the home is that after placing a radiation holding "bag" over the Router to ameliorate any harmful effects, when I remove the bag, it is red-hot. Similarly, I cannot speak with my cellphone next to my head for I feel it disturbs or disrupts my brain: there is a palpable sensation of heat generated by the phone. I could talk for hours using the old analog phones which were directly wired to a jack in the wall. Now, I can speak on a cellphone next to my ear for a maximum of 3-5 minutes; after that period, I then become aware of heat and who knows what damage the frequencies are doing to my brain cells. This is subjective, but I also feel great discomfort with the WiFi on; cannot sleep properly; I have also noticed an increase of rheumatic pain, unusual agitation in domestic animals, and so forth. Therefore it is almost always off, but I need it on for a couple hours each day for computer use and cellphone data use. I think it is impossible to escape these radionic frequencies nowadays; but something probably can be developed to mitigate their deleterious impacts on biological life: plants, animals, humans. But that would cost money. I need not add that there is an increase in discomfort and most probably, multi-cellular damage, with the increase of 4G to 5G, and I can only imagine the horrors if 6G is introduced.

#2219I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…by Faith C Tarbert » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Cancer & tumors: The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer.
  • Children, schools & development: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: You may wish to describe how wireless radiation has affected you, your child or family; health effects or cancer you have experienced; concerns about long-term exposure; experiences involving cell phones, Wi-Fi, cell towers or other wireless sources; or impacts you have observed on animals, wildlife, plants or the environment.] I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Wildlife & environment: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Exposure limits & testing: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077288

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077288

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: [Please add your personal story here. You may wish to describe how wireless radiation has affected you, your child or family; health effects or cancer you have experienced; concerns about long-term exposure; experiences involving cell phones, Wi-Fi, cell towers or other wireless sources; or impacts you have observed on animals, wildlife, plants or the environment.] I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

#2220I believe I have been affected by electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) for a number of years. I have had sur…by Andrew Sabatini » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Sensitivity & health experiences: I have had surgery to treat atrial fibrillation which I think was caused by increasing cellular phone usage and the mandatory deployment of smart meters all over the state of Pennsylvania.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: I have had surgery to treat atrial fibrillation which I think was caused by increasing cellular phone usage and the mandatory deployment of smart meters all over the state of Pennsylvania.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077285

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077285

I believe I have been affected by electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) for a number of years. I have had surgery to treat atrial fibrillation which I think was caused by increasing cellular phone usage and the mandatory deployment of smart meters all over the state of Pennsylvania. There is a connection between the increased EMF signals bombarding the population and a higher rate of diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, probably not as noticeable in younger adults, but underlying future development.