All HHS comments · page 265

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

#5281Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Linda Nedderman-Eaton » 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.

#5282Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Cami Lewton » 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.

#5283Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Michael Lavarda » 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.

#5284Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Harold Watson » 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.

#5285Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Thomas Michaels » 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.

#5286Reports wireless sensitivity and requests HHS investigation of health effects, research gaps and potentia…by Luke Yamaguchi » 2026-10-07
AI summary & topic connections

Reports wireless sensitivity and requests HHS investigation of health effects, research gaps and potentially vulnerable populations.

  • Electromagnetic sensitivity: reless Radiation Exposure. As someone who is sensitive to wireless radiation, I support HHS taking an active role in examining the
  • Research & federal duties: pulations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health.
  • Children & vulnerable groups: rrent research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and esta

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 in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. As someone who is sensitive to wireless radiation, I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence.

I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health.

#5287Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by VIRGINIA GOMEZ » 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.

#5288Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Lynda Leibowitz » 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.

#5289Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Marcel Liberge » 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.

#5290Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Chad Ryan » 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.

#5291Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Susan Jambor » 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.

#5292Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Pamela VourosCallahan » 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.

#5293Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Leigh Connealy » 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.

#5294Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by marie scherbaum » 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.

#5295Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Carol Begalka » 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.

#5296Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by mary meadows » 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.

#5297Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Craig Harding » 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.

#5298Requests independent review of exposure limits, chronic and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductive e…by George and Donna Machen » 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

We are 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.

We 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.

We 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.

#5299Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Robert Rainey » 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.

#5300Requests independent review of exposure limits, cumulative and nonthermal effects, cancer and reproductiv…by Harvey Guilford » 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.