All HHS comments · page 264

7,080 public comments, newest first, 20 per page. Keep scrolling to load more.

#5261Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by CLAUDIA RYDEL » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5262Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Ruth Yacko » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5263Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Marieth Hurtado » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5264Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Donna Holtsclaw » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5265Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Charles Smith » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5266Alleges repeated directed-energy attacks causing pain, tinnitus and incapacitation, reports perceived ben…by John Gilmore » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Alleges repeated directed-energy attacks causing pain, tinnitus and incapacitation, reports perceived benefit from a detox product, and requests an end to the alleged targeting.

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am a victim of being tortured with emf’s and rf radiation and or microwave frequencies daily. I first noticed the effects of the in December of 2025, although I believe this has been going on for at least a couple of years longer than that.

I have found that a heavy metal detox of EMTB has greatly diminished the pain and concussion like symptoms that I was suffering from by these attacks, however, occasionally they strength of these attacks overwhelm me and incapacitates me for a few days.

I also am living with constant tinnitus, which I feel is directly from being tortured by these directed energy weapons and I feel I hear the sounds intensify when another round of being hit by them starts.

Please help end this torture program that is disabling me and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in the United States and many more abroad, so we can get back our life that we once had and deserve to be free.

Thank you for giving me a voice to plead for help and thank you in advance for everything you will do to help the targeted individuals,

John G

#5267Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Sherri Kinney » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5268Requests independent review of wireless exposure limits and chronic effects, protection for vulnerable gr…by Ellen Carter » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of wireless exposure limits and chronic effects, protection for vulnerable groups and wired alternatives, while suggesting additional radiopharmaceutical information sources.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

Far more direct information ask radiopharnacueutical management internal system through lilly.com or dose.com about the dangers. I am submitting this comment as a

consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5269Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Vicki Little » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5270Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Lori Lopez » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5271Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by James Conway » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5272Requests independent review of exposure limits, chronic and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive e…by Robert J. Feldman » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, chronic and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protections for vulnerable groups and wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

Thank you.

#5273Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Norene Bailey » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5274Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Linda Freier » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5275Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Carol Tao » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5276Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Faith DeWaay » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5277Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Eileen Waller » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5278Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Randolph Baptiste » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5279Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Marian Nichols » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

#5280Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Barbara Lewis » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive evidence, and protection of vulnerable groups with wired alternatives.

  • Research & federal duties: ther potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest
  • Exposure limits & oversight: ct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to
  • Cancer & tumors: issue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Pl
  • Reproduction & pregnancy: ating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize resea
  • Children & vulnerable groups: concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that refle
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: e and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards whe

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

Original comment · unedited text

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices.

I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development.

Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure.

Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects.

I ask HHS to:

•Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups.

•Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest.

•Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools.

•Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient.

Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.