All HHS comments · page 267

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.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure.

I am responding from the perspective of a patient.

the electric company installed smart meters on the home I was renting and all the surrounding neighbors. I developed headaches 24/7 and muscle spasms. I could not sleep, I could not work, I could not function. I had to go to a wooded area and sleep in my car to get any rest. I became dehydrated and spent nine days in the hospital. I had to move to a rural area to get as far away from radiation as possible leaving my family and friends and had to close my business.

Some friends had inherited an old farm house 2 miles from a cell tower and did NOT have a SMART METER which they let me move into wtith rent far below market. I have since recovered my health but I have NOT been able to re-establish my business and am struggling to live on social security.

Then the local electric company installed smart meters on my neighbors and threatened to disconnect my electric service if I did not allow them to install one on this home. I then agreed to pay them $100 to install an analog meter and $40 each month for them to read it. This is an EXORTION FEE. I am capable of reading the meter and providing the info to them just like residents of other states including Indiana.

These utility companies have a monopoly and they are using it to profit at our expense.

Thank you for considering my physical and financial comments.

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.

We have discovered that the 5 Ghz wifi radio band prevents my wife from sleeping properly. My wife had a sudden onset of disturbed sleep every night. We gave careful thought to what may have changed in our household and realized we had installed Verizon FIOS service. Verizon provided us with a device which provides two wifi bands, 2.5 Ghz ad 5 Ghz. When we turned off the wifi transmissions, my wife's sleep immediately returned to normal. Without telling my wife, I turned the two wifi bands back on, one at a time. the 2.5 Ghz band did not seem to disturb her sleep. A few nights later, when I turned the 5Ghz band back on, her sleep disruption immediately returned. Turning the band off again relived her problems. So it is clear the the 5 Ghz microwave radiation has profoundly negative effects on her. This makes me suspect that all of the microwave radiation we are subjected two can be biologically active. Even if the effects are sub clinical, there is no way to know what long term harms will result from uncontrolled exposure to microwaves, much of which is at alarmingly high intensities.

I live in rural Montana and lighting that is at 6,000 k led as they come up and down Hills can be extremely blinding to the point where I have to stop my vehicle.

I have had Deer Run in front of me and I couldn't even see them because I was so blinded by the oncoming car. I am still not sure how I've missed them. It even affects my young kids who have to put their hands up as the car passes so they can maintain their eyes on the road. When you go into bigger cities with all the lighting is not as nearly as bad as it is in dark rural areas. I hear about people going off the road all the time due to the blinding headlights especially older people I hope this helps you come to a good decision by at least softening low beams. High beam LEDs are still great and wonderful living in rural areas. It's just the low beams and the LEDs are so extremely frustrating. Subarus are probably the worst offenders you can't even tell between their high and low beams. Enter thank you for your

The Federal government has abdicated its role in protecting the public from sources of potentially harmful non-ionizing radiation emanating from cell towers, routers, microwave facilities, satellites, and connected devices. The FCC standards for exposure are really quite a joke, not having been updated since 1996. Yet, even if those standards were adequate at the time, which is highly questionable, the amount of radiation from the above sources has exploded, especially since 2010, and includes parts of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum which were not in common use at the time.

It is a clear dereliction of duty to roll out features like 5G, Starlink, and Bluetooth without first PROVING that this radiation is harmless. The burden of proof should be on the companies and the regulators, not citizens.

The FCC should be in high gear to correct the deficiencies in its own studies, its professed ignorance of studies which show harmful effects, and revoke any and all licenses that can't meet the bar of proven safety without further delay and obfuscation.

The HHS has been absolutely ineffective and disinterested in protecting humans, animals, and insects from RF radiation. There can be no excuses. The only response that is worth listening to from HHS is a moratorium on any further deployment of any source of RF emissions, and notice to the industry that its continued license to operate will be provisional for 12 months pending proof based on controlled studies that RF emissions are harmless.

LED headlights are TOO BRIGHT & make it more difficult to drive into oncoming traffic as well as blinding you in the rear view mirror at night. The Food and Drug Administration must comply with 21 U.S.C. 360ii to test and evaluate LED headlights for biological safety.

The brighter lights also impact migrating bird species at night.

I became extremely sensitive to EMF after PGE put a cellular smart meter on my house. I lost my high paying job, my house and cannot be near cell towers or cell phones anymore. It completely destroyed my life. Regulations have to be put into place. Studies have to be acted on. Corporations cannot be allowed to destroy us.

When a smart meter was installed on my house, without my permission or knowledge, my life of EMF/RF sensitivity began. I had to move my bedroom as the smart meter was on the master bedroom side of the house. I was experiencing headaches, brain fog, rashes, severe fatigue and insomnia. Moving my bedroom helped somewhat initially, but then I began experiencing headaches whenever I put my phone to my head. My head would throb for hours. Exhaustion still remained an ongoing issue as well and I had to research ways to relieve the insomnia. Even after mitigating the insomnia, I still continued to suffer from exhaustion and headaches. Then I started experiencing issues when I was near large cell towers for an extended period of time and then it seemed like it was happening more and more often. When the headaches and brain fog would strike, I would look around the area as we left the wedding or event ect. and I would always be able to locate a large tower. This was years before anyone acknowledged this was an issue, so I had to do the research on my own and do everything in my power to mitigate my exposure and figure out how to get relief from the symptoms. I also invested in numerous products to help mitigate the exposure. Some seemed help somewhat, some were a waste of money. The more investigation I did, the more science I found showing that EMF/RF sensitivity is a real and valid issue and that many suffer from it, many times not even knowing that is what is the cause. It is frustrating to me that I am being exposed more and more each passing year, without my consent and without any regulations.

My name is and I live in New Jersey. I am a former nurse and 67 years old. I was diagnosed with EHS environmental hypersensitivity in 2018 when I moved into a rental after selling my house. Within less than two days I was falling over from dizziness bruised four ribs couldn’t swallow. I was crying filled with anxiety and depression. When two days prior I was perfectly fine. Then more symptoms started appearing, and then I knew that I was being exposed to something. This was not normal and I went to my integrative who had diagnosed me a few years prior with mold illness. A rattle off 17 symptoms and he asked me if I had a smart meter on the building and I said what is that? I’ve never heard of one and I had no idea what it was and he explained and he said go back there and take a look and see if you have one in sure enough I did. I bought a tri meter to test the radiation and I have the videos of it and times out can’t even measure the radiation level. It’s so high. Every meter. Then I came inside to check the dirty energy coming out of the sockets and the radiation is blaring out of them too. Now I’ve got the refrigerator. That’s a smart. I have to have all these boards the circuit boards removed from my appliances because you’re all a bunch of criminals and you’re violating our constitutional rights and we don’t want any part of this nonsense and you’re trying to shove it down our throats. What we’re gonna shove it right back down your throat so that you can choke just as we’re choking. So then they put a smart meter in my house my water authority in my township without my permission and I have opt out for a traditional analog. They’re refusing to give me one and instead they’re threatening to call outreach and social services to do a fully evaluation and intervention so they’d rather lock me up then address the fact that the smart meter they placed in my house now a year and a half ago is caused permanent damage to my hands. I have CRPS the most painful disease known to medicine no cure no treatment so they’ve caused permanent disability in these hands now with that meter and they’ve committed a bias crime because they were in receipt of my doctors letters…

Read the full comment →

There is a lot of literature/articles/studies to support 'No704'. Here is just one -

Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, codified as Communications Act at 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv), states:

“No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.”

Some courts have interpreted “environmental effects” to include human health effects. This effectively strips local authorities of the ability to oppose cell tower permits based on health and environmental effects, as long as the emissions fall within the FCC’s limits. This is unconstitutional because it deprives states and local governments of their traditional police powers designed to protect the health and welfare of their citizens but does not provide a federal remedy or other meaningful oversight.

Additionally, several court decisions hold that local jurisdictions cannot regulate other forms of wireless technologies (WiFi routers, cell phones, etc.) because the FCC has sole authority to regulate the safety of these devices. As long as RF emissions fall within the FFC’s limits, people cannot sue the device manufacturer for their RF injuries. This deprives people of their Constitutional rights, e.g. informed consent, property rights, due process, right to a jury trial, and right to life and liberty.

This legal framework must be dismantled because:

RF radiation below FCC limits has been shown to harm children’s health and the environment.

Children harmed by RF radiation exposure are left without remedies or compensation.

FCC guidelines are outdated, do not take children into account, and fail to consider current scientific evidence.

Excessive FCC authority overrides local control and judicial oversight.

Smart meters and wireless towers made me dizzy and non functional-foggy brained too. The research confirms this. It invades our homes, there is When the towers and then smart meters started I got dizzy and have had brain fog. Hard to function and Pleae read the research from Europe and STOP THEM! There is no escape! And 6G has promised to track our every move and broadcast even worse. Can even YOU stop this? the Cell towers are in our children's schools areas and on churches. The bad guys are after us in every way possible to scramble our brains, make us sick and confused. PS don't forget the chem trails!!!

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.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure.

I am responding from the perspective of a concerned citizen. This RF radiation is real and very harmful as I have had the experience of knowing people with health issues related to this radiation. I have deep concerns over what we as the general public are exposed to from towers and personal wireless devices. I feel that the level of danger to the public needs to be be investigated thoroughly.

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.

Thank you for providing individuals, families, health care providers, researchers, and scientists with an opportunity to finally be heard on this critical public health issue.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure.

I am responding from the perspective of a concerned member of the public.

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.

Thank you for providing individuals, families, health care providers, researchers, and scientists with an opportunity to finally be heard on this critical public health issue.

I have two friends, one deceased and one partially paralyzed due to cell phone use. They both understood and exclaimed that the locations of their cancers correlated with the locations they held their cell phones to their heads for years. Unbelievable that the FCC only test for temperature in determining the safety of these devices.

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.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a family member and caregiver. Several years ago I and my father tried to stop Penelec from placing a "smartmeter" on our house due to the fact that my father has a pace-maker aiding his heart. I had heard that the RF produced by these meters had been known to cause health emergencies for people so equipped. We were told by the PA utility commission we had to hire a lawyer to fight the installation. Dad did hold back Penelec's effort for awhile, but it was costing tens of thousands of dollars and so he stopped. Penelec installed the meter on our house while we were away from the property. Thirty days later Dad suffered a stroke. He had to use a wheelchair for the remainder of his life.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a family member and caregiver. Several years ago I and my father tried to stop Penelec from placing a "smartmeter" on our house due to the fact that my father has a pace-maker aiding his heart. I had heard that the RF produced by these meters had been known to cause health emergencies for people so equipped. We were told by the PA utility commission we had to hire a lawyer to fight the installation. Dad did hold back Penelec's effort for awhile, but it was costing tens of thousands of dollars and so he stopped. Penelec installed the meter on our house while we were away from the property. Thirty days later Dad suffered a stroke. He had to use a wheelchair for the remainder of his life.

My family is desperate to make sure we do not live near 5G towers. We purchased a home in 2021 and moved from out of state . We started getting headaches and a general feeling of not well. We learned we had two local towers in front and behind us. We sold and move to the country nine months later with no towers in sight. The unwell issues stopped. If we had stayed who knows the long term affects this would have caused us. It would probably be news worthy 20 years from now after people and the environment all show the damage! We need our elected officials to stop this now. Where’s our EPA with this issue and the Weather Modification in our Skies showering who knows what metals and chemicals upon us and our environment!

Our bees are disappearing… This is critical!