AI summary & topic connections
Original comment · unedited text
26110077284
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077284
All FCC comments · page 112
2,415 public comments, newest first, 20 per page. Keep scrolling to load more.
AI summary & topic connections
Original comment · unedited text
26110077282
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077282
Official documents · 1
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
After researching the internet to understand my condition, I sold that car and removed all wireless devices from our house, because they cause me to have hours of painful headaches which nothing, except 10-24 hours of staying at home, will remove; our house is now wired with ethernet.
- Towers, antennas & siting:
This issue matters to me personally because I am sensitive to ALL wireless devices, including cell towers, cell phones, and smart meters.
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
This issue matters to me personally because I am sensitive to ALL wireless devices, including cell towers, cell phones, and smart meters.
- Wired connections & alternatives:
After researching the internet to understand my condition, I sold that car and removed all wireless devices from our house, because they cause me to have hours of painful headaches which nothing, except 10-24 hours of staying at home, will remove; our house is now wired with ethernet.
- Exposure limits & testing:
Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
- Court remand & agency accountability:
Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
- Research, evidence & monitoring:
The FCC has no authority or expertise in biology or public health nor have they studied RF radiation affects on public health, but the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077281
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077281
I am highly concerned about the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The FCC has no authority or expertise in biology or public health nor have they studied RF radiation affects on public health, but the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards. RF radiation DOES affect public health and DOES cause biological harm. This issue matters to me personally because I am sensitive to ALL wireless devices, including cell towers, cell phones, and smart meters. I became sensitive seven years ago after driving a newer car equipped with bluetooth devices. After researching the internet to understand my condition, I sold that car and removed all wireless devices from our house, because they cause me to have hours of painful headaches which nothing, except 10-24 hours of staying at home, will remove; our house is now wired with ethernet. Where I frequently drive, there are six cell towers within ten miles of my house. These wireless devices are dangerous to human and animal health. More wireless will cause chronic illness to continue rising and even death for millions of people. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence of others and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.
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.
- Pregnancy & reproduction:
This issue matters to me personally because I am aware of sufficient amounts of evidence and studies that show the great harm EMF's cause, like causing fertility issues and illnesses that can result in death.
- 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.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077280
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077280
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. This issue matters to me personally because I am aware of sufficient amounts of evidence and studies that show the great harm EMF's cause, like causing fertility issues and illnesses that can result in death. 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.
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
My being exposed to wifi, cell phones, smart meters, etc has caused me much discomfort and pain due to the microwaves created and received by these devices.
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
The FCC and FDA are asleep at the switch and not protecting people from the damage done when people are exposed to radio and microwaves produced by smart devices including cell phones, wifi, personal computers, etc.
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
My being exposed to wifi, cell phones, smart meters, etc has caused me much discomfort and pain due to the microwaves created and received by these devices.
- Wildlife & environment:
Man creates his artificial environment, and then that created environment recreates man.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077279
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077279
My being exposed to wifi, cell phones, smart meters, etc has caused me much discomfort and pain due to the microwaves created and received by these devices. Man creates his artificial environment, and then that created environment recreates man. The nature of electromagnetic fields problem (unlike cigarette smoke which is harmful) is that you can't see it or feel it. But the damage is being done non-stop. The engineers who created this technology hid behind the fallacy that if these emf could not raise the temperature of a person's skin, it was totally harmless. Nothing could be further from the truth. Some call this emf man made pollution: dirty electricity found on the electrical wires in a house. Using an ociloscope will show radio and microwave activity associated with power switch mode transformers that convert 110 volt alternating current fields (aka ELF extremely low fields) into pulsing direct current fields. These energy saving devices were forced on manufacturers to save energy, but create micro sparks or arcs that resonate with the integrity of human cells. In fact the arcing makes the cell membranes leaky. With leaky cell walls you now compromise the integrity of the body junctions that serve as barriers to prevent unwanted toxins to enter. These junctions include the skin barrier, the gut barrier and the brain barrier. Hence cell phones, wifi, smart meters and smart devices cause human beings much damage to their body's primary defense barriers. So now due to cell phones, wifi, smart meters, etc people now have compromised immune function due to leaky skin, leaky gut barrier and leaky brain barrier. The FCC and FDA are asleep at the switch and not protecting people from the damage done when people are exposed to radio and microwaves produced by smart devices including cell phones, wifi, personal computers, etc. Government has a duty to regulate commerce that causes harm to the planet, the people, the livestock, the bugs, the fish, the most fragile living forms on this planet.
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:
This issue matters to me personally because I have seen the effects the towers have on birds.
- 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.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077277
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077277
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 have seen the effects the towers have on birds. They swarm them and act neurotic. This is a tower that is feet from an elementary school. One person could very well see that if this tower is effecting wildlife, it has to cause some type of reaction in children or humans in general. Electro magnetic frequencies (EMF) are dispersed from devices, why wouldn’t a tower disperse the same? Continuing with new construction would almost be like a legal form of murder. The environmental signs are there and we need to stop ignoring them. 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.
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
I couldn't sleep the entire three days, had a non-stop headache and some nausea, and couldn't wait to leave.
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
I couldn't sleep the entire three days, had a non-stop headache and some nausea, and couldn't wait to leave.
- Towers, antennas & siting:
I always feel an acute sensitivity to the 5G towers, and am always praying one is not planted close to my business, because I would have to sell.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077276
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077276
I always feel an acute sensitivity to the 5G towers, and am always praying one is not planted close to my business, because I would have to sell. Recently I booked an AirBNB while travelling, and unknowingly ended up in a place one block from a 5G tower. I couldn't sleep the entire three days, had a non-stop headache and some nausea, and couldn't wait to leave. I have a friend who got deathly sick from being too close to a tower. I've always felt appalled that we as citizens have absolutely no say about where these are placed, especially when there is so much evidence as to their negative effect on human health. I personally don't need the internet to be that much faster at that price, and now 6G is coming? Heaven help us....
AI summary & topic connections
- Children, schools & development:
I lived next to a cell phone tower when my wife was pregnant and had our first and second child.
- Pregnancy & reproduction:
I lived next to a cell phone tower when my wife was pregnant and had our first and second child.
- Towers, antennas & siting:
I lived next to a cell phone tower when my wife was pregnant and had our first and second child.
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
I lived next to a cell phone tower when my wife was pregnant and had our first and second child.
- Exposure limits & testing:
We don’t know because there has not been adequate testing to determine this.
- Court remand & agency accountability:
The FCC is not an expert in health and biology and physiology, yet it ignores court orders to consider these things.
- Research, evidence & monitoring:
Yet the FCC plows ahead without any serious consideration or scientific review.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077275
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077275
The FCC is not an expert in health and biology and physiology, yet it ignores court orders to consider these things. I lived next to a cell phone tower when my wife was pregnant and had our first and second child. They like many people have different issues that reveal themselves over time. How do we know that none of them were because of the close proximity to that intense radiation exposure? We don’t know because there has not been adequate testing to determine this. Yet the FCC plows ahead without any serious consideration or scientific review. There is plenty of evidence to show the possibility of harm to my children. Worth some more deep research into these health concerns. The determination can be made with the right kind of research. Lets do that adequately and then we will know. And true progress can be made. Either to allow rapid deployment of useful technology, or to help provide the evidence which redirects the industry to the technology that will not harm humans nor biology. Health is cared for and progress is made. This is the responsible sustainable route. The prior route has been only to further corporate interest at the flagrant risk to human and environmental health. Please do the right thing!
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
This always improves their symptoms.
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
I began to suffer from extreme insomnia, chronic health issues, etc.
- Children, schools & development:
The children are being harmed the most.
- Disability, access & daily life:
I moved to the country, disabled all WiFi, had the smart meter removed and installed ethernet cable for our internet.
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
after the installation of our WiFi router and the purchase of cell phones back in 2004.
- Wired connections & alternatives:
I moved to the country, disabled all WiFi, had the smart meter removed and installed ethernet cable for our internet.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077274
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077274
I began to suffer from extreme insomnia, chronic health issues, etc. after the installation of our WiFi router and the purchase of cell phones back in 2004. These issues went on for more than a decade until I was diagnosed with myelin issues and emf sensitivity. I moved to the country, disabled all WiFi, had the smart meter removed and installed ethernet cable for our internet. I am now able to sleep and my health issues continue to heal. Whenever I encounter a friend or family member with insomnia, I instruct them to unplug their router at night and leave their cell phone in a room far from their bedroom. This always improves their symptoms. This is real. The technology is toxic. The children are being harmed the most.
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
instead of greed and a desire to hurt-torture-kill human beings in the name of 'saving the planet.' Money is a narrative created by those who created it and propagandized it into 'reality.' A Monopoly game is as real as the system we are all subject to.
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
How much more evidence do you need that this bombardment is responsible for 20th-21st century epidemics of chronic insomnia, anxiety, depression, agitation, and gut-brain health issues.
- 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 feel the effects of the humongous two-tier cell tower that is within hundreds of feet from my home.
- 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.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077273 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077273 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 feel the effects of the humongous two-tier cell tower that is within hundreds of feet from my home. Not only has it lowered home values in my area, but more importantly I feel what it emits in every cell of my body. I feel in my body, the constant bombardment of waves coming from these towers, cellphones, WiFi, repeaters, and satellites pumping out toxic waveforms. How much more evidence do you need that this bombardment is responsible for 20th-21st century epidemics of chronic insomnia, anxiety, depression, agitation, and gut-brain health issues. And probably cancer. There used to be tons of wildlife…
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
I get headaches are increasing in severity.
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
I have insomnia - much worse with wireless on, lessoned when I can turn wireless off - at least in my apartment, however I am unable to block wireless from the neighboring houses.
- Children, schools & development:
What is is doing to our children?
Original comment · unedited text
26110077272
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077272
I am sensitive to wireless radiation. Over the last few years my sensitivity is getting worse. I get headaches are increasing in severity. I have insomnia - much worse with wireless on, lessoned when I can turn wireless off - at least in my apartment, however I am unable to block wireless from the neighboring houses. Everything seems worse now - allergies seem to be increasing in severity, and when I am sick with the flu, those symptoms are also worse. I attibute the worsening of symptoms to be the direct result of the increase in wireless radiation - as I can see increases in the amount of wireless networks available in my neighborhood and my local area. Wireless radiation harms people. I am older - and I see the effects. What is is doing to our children?
AI summary & topic connections
Original comment · unedited text
26110077271
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077271
Official documents · 1
AI summary & topic connections
- Cancer & tumors:
13-84: Radiofrequency is a known carcinogen, the closer, the more health risks.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077270
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077270
Re ET Docket No. 13-84: Radiofrequency is a known carcinogen, the closer, the more health risks. RF can heat biological tissue and cause tissue damage. We are in a constant cloud of wireless signals that could pose risks. We look to the FCC and other government agencies to PROTECT us from the harm. Shrugging shoulders and thinking, it's worth the risk to have this or that luxury, is not what we seek from our protectors. We want none of our loved ones to suffer because the government was too lazy to protect us. We want none of our biological tissues damaged because someone was unwilling to prioritize our health. Please be at the forefront of acknowledging this can pose risks and fight against it.
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
The most vulnerable of our population are suffering, without the knowledge of the symptoms.
- Cancer & tumors:
Losing a son and investigating many other 'school cancer clusters' this can no longer be ignored!
- Children, schools & development:
Losing a son and investigating many other 'school cancer clusters' this can no longer be ignored!
- Court remand & agency accountability:
When is the FCC going to quit ignoring the August 13, 2021 win?
Original comment · unedited text
26110077269
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077269
When is the FCC going to quit ignoring the August 13, 2021 win? Losing a son and investigating many other 'school cancer clusters' this can no longer be ignored! The FCC has not followed the court orders of, and since, 2021. Wireless radiation has been proven harmful and industry must be held accountable. The FCC has been captured both by industry and the ITU-BDT (Technology Development Bureau). Quit kicking-the-can down the road. Our children's lives are at stake with schools filled with wireless. The most vulnerable of our population are suffering, without the knowledge of the symptoms. Doctors need to be aware. If these federal agencies are not going to do their job, then step aside and let the experts do theirs! This must stop!
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:
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.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077268
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077268
Hello. I am writing concerning 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, much of which is unknown due to lack of safety testing. The health and wellbeing of humans should take precedence over the wealth of the cellular and internet industries. 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. This is unacceptable. They seem to be only concerned with money, not human health. 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. Wireless radiation poses a threat to all life. Some people, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN, are more susceptible to the health risks associated with wireless radiation and it's the job of the ADULTS to protect them, not the profits of those who incentivize with $$$.
AI summary & topic connections
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
Since the City of Austin installed two smart meters on our house, which back up directly to the bed wall of our bedroom, I have not been able to sleep normally, as I have all my life.
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
Since the City of Austin installed two smart meters on our house, which back up directly to the bed wall of our bedroom, I have not been able to sleep normally, as I have all my life.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077266
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077266
Since the City of Austin installed two smart meters on our house, which back up directly to the bed wall of our bedroom, I have not been able to sleep normally, as I have all my life. I bought an EMF meter to determine the level of RF/ microwave radiation, and in our bedroom it was far higher than the level considered safe, with peaks that are orders of magnitude higher still, occurring 24-7-365. I installed faraday fabric on the wall behind our bed, and the RF/ microwave level dropped considerably, although it was still high nearest the wall. My wife and I believe this entire wireless 'revolution' is damaging to human health and well-being. We urge strong regulation of this industry to rein in industry abuse. Users have not been given the information needed to make decisions about wireless products.
AI summary & topic connections
- Sensitivity & health experiences:
I can feel the impact on my body as it causes migraines, tinnutis, sensitivity to sounds, smells and vision.
- Sleep & neurological concerns:
I am unable to sleep or function when surrounding by them.
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
During COVID the power company installed a smart meter on my house without any notice.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077265
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077265
I have been negatively impacted by artifical EMF's for the last decade. I can feel the impact on my body as it causes migraines, tinnutis, sensitivity to sounds, smells and vision. I also become extremely dizzy and cannot form clear thoughts. I am unable to sleep or function when surrounding by them. During COVID the power company installed a smart meter on my house without any notice. Therefore I couldn't opt out before it was installed. The 30 days it was on my home was the sickest I had ever been. I couldn't get out of bed and I couldn't form coheisive sentences or thoughts. I had a debilitating migraine for those 30 days. I had to send an official letter from an attorney to have it removed and a digital meter put on instead. There was no way for me to receive my analog, non-transmitting meter back. There is sufficient evidence of the dangers of artifical EMF however profit seems to be put over health of humans time and time again. I vehemently oppose any smart technology and the increased use of EMF we are exposed to that we cannot opt out of.
AI summary & topic connections
- Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices:
I myself am allergic to smart phones.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077263
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077263
I have a friend who is allergic to fluorescent lights. This has severely limited the kinds of work she can do: she has worked outside, even in winter, for many years. I myself am allergic to smart phones. They make me feel wired, vibrating in a hyper, weird way. I got rid of my smart phone and use my stupid phone just for emergencies. Fortunately I have control over my emf exposure. What about those who don't?
AI summary & topic connections
- Court remand & agency accountability:
The FCC was under a court order with EHT v.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077261
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077261
The FCC was under a court order with EHT v. FCC (Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission) to review pulsed microwave emission standards BACK IN 2021! It is 5 years later and the FCC has still not done nothing to address that court order. Are we a nation of laws or are we not? This type of breakdown of the Constitutional framework does NOTHING to instill confidence in government and its agencies. It leads to distrust and suspicions of agency capture by the very industries the FCC is supposed to be regulating. IT IS TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING Remember that YOU and YOUR FAMILIES are also affected by the pulsed microwave radiation soup we are all swimming in. I look forward to this court order being addressed with INTEGRITY.
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:
We had an environmental assessment done at our home and discovered that the wireless phone base station we had placed next to my desk to the right of my computer screen was putting off radiation that was off the charts.
- 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.
Original comment · unedited text
26110077260 https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077260 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 was diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer at the age of 41 and given 3 months to live by my doctors. My husband and I had 4 year old twin daughters at the time. We were devastated. We had an environmental assessment done at our home and discovered that the wireless phone base station we had placed next to my desk to the right of my computer screen was putting off radiation that was off the charts. And my tumor was one my right side just a foot or two from the base station. Before cancer, we were unaware of the harms of RF radiation. We assumed as most people do that our government would not…
Loading more comments…