All HHS comments · page 279

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

I have been fighting cancer for two years. The Cancer Center for Healing in Irvine warns all of us against exposure to EMFs and the role it plays in cancer development. I have read that one in every two men and one in every three women will develop cancer. HHS should address this issue immediately.

HHS should be taking an active role in examining the health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise, 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 the opportunity to be heard on this critical public health issue.

Bridget Richards, Lake Forest, CA

I have found recently that my electric company switched my meter for a smart meter for a year. I had called the electric company asking them if something was wrong because electric was being heated up inside of the house. They said nothing. After a year of radiation burns and dog seizures, I had an electrician come look and he said it’s your smart meter. I told him I don’t have one. He said I do. When I called the electric company they wouldn’t remove it. I told them I wanted to opt out and hey said they will meet about it next week. They are not removing it!

Please help!!!

Crawford Electric of Bourbon, Missouri will not Opt you out.

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 parent and concerned member of the public. For about the past 6 years I have personally experienced episodes of dizziness and loss of balance. I am an active 58 year old male in relatively good shape with no family history of this condition. While I cannot definitively connect this condition to wireless radiation, I intuitively believe there may be a connection since the exposure to wireless radiation is ever present and from multiple sources in our daily environment (e.g., routers, cell towers, 4G and 5G cell phones, Bluetooth and Wi-Fi from innumerable "smart" devices used in our everyday products). We have been concerned about the vast amounts of legitimate scientific evidence from many sources indicating strong concerns with wireless radiation on the health of the environment, especially people and children. We are frankly shocked that the federal agency responsible for addressing questions about health effects from wireless radiation has been under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), an agency responsible for regulating communications technology and spectrum. They have a long proven history of royally "flubbing it up". Their history would be laughable if the concerns were not so serious. For example, the FCC's RF exposure guidelines date to 1996. In 2019, the agency declined to change them saying the available evidence supported maintaining the existing standards. Wireless technology has changed dramatically since then - smartphones, Wi-Fi networks, wearable devices, smart appliances and other connected technologies now create sources of exposure that were not part of everyday life when the FCC adopted its guidelines. In 2021, a federal appeals court ordered the FCC to address evidence and concerns about the health and environmental effects of RF radiation and explain how it determined that its limits adequately protect people and the environment. In May 2026, the court was petitioned to force the FCC to comply with…

Read the full comment →

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.

My family and I are very concerned with all the wireless technology. We feel it may play a role in autism, cancer, and other health problems. You can’t even buy small appliances without Bluetooth. It’s getting way out of hand. We can’t have my alarm system on our home anymore without upgrading to a wireless option. Please find ways to encourage companies to go back to the old ways of hard wiring their products. We used to have a camera system in our home with a monitor for our adult son who happens to have a diagnosis on the autism spectrum and that system used old radio waves. It worked so great in real time. That system broke and all the new systems work via WiFi and they don’t work nearly as well as the old system we had.

Thank you for caring.

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 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.

Hello,

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 husband, father, and concerned member of the public.

My wife has been experiencing multiple sleepless nights around the time that some new 5G towers have popped up in our neighborhood. She is not able to function well throughout the day unless she stops and takes a nap. However, we have two little ones to take care of as well, so she's often not able to even catch up on sleep. And the cycle continues the next night. And this has been going on for a couple months or so. We believe this is due to the 5G radiation in our area.

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 and families with an opportunity to be heard.

WHY do we have to put up with this??? It gave my dog cancer , all the animals are sick!!

My comment is regarding cell towers near schools/neighborhoods and WiFi in schools. These are two very important areas to look at when analyzing the safety of RF and EMF. Kids spend up 40+ hours a week in school and are bombarded by WiFi. Other countries such as France, Israel, Belgium, Cyprus and many others ban WiFi in schools due to the adverse health impacts RF and EMF have on children. The other area that needs to be examined very closely is the proximity of cell towers to homes and near schools. The FCC has tied the hands of anyone trying to get information on the safety levels of nearby RF levels, based on 1997 standards (which we all know was many years before WiFi was used). Local municipalities constantly reject anyone pursuing information of these cell towers, in some cases located within feet of their homes, citing that they cannot do anything to help because of the FCC guidelines. There is no reason the Federal Communications Commission should continue to be in charge of peoples health from RF and EMF. This needs to change. I’m sure the HHS will uncover a lot of alarming information when they look at how badly the FCC has been mismanaging and misleading the American people. It will be amazing to see everyone feeling healthier, happier, less fatigued, less anxious and get better sleep once new standards for exposure are in place by the HHS.

Re: Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397 I submit this as an individual consumer, patient, parent, and family member. It is based on personal experience and precautionary public-health concerns. Questions 2–4 — Personal Experience Exposure to Wi-Fi routers, phones, cell towers, Bluetooth devices, and environments with substantial wireless activity appears to coincide with recurring symptoms for me: ringing in my ears, tingling in my hands and body, headaches, brain fog, difficulty concentrating, chronic fatigue, poor sleep, and inflammation-related symptoms. I am also concerned about possible oxidative stress. My symptoms become more noticeable around wireless devices and higher-exposure environments. Reducing exposure and using wired connections are important to me. Personal testimony does not establish causation, but experiences like mine should be documented and investigated rather than dismissed. Questions 5–8 — Standards and Measurement In my view, current U.S. limits are far too high and emphasize acute heating rather than possible nonthermal, chronic, and cumulative effects. HHS should evaluate pulsing, modulation, peak and average power density, nighttime exposure, proximity, simultaneous frequencies, and lifetime exposure. My requested precautionary ceiling for chronic ambient wireless exposure is below 0.0001 milliwatts per square meter (0.1 microwatts per square meter), with exposure kept as close to zero as reasonably possible. This corresponds with the Building Biology SBM-2015 “no anomaly” category for RF radiation in sleeping areas. Other proposals include the BioInitiative Working Group’s 3–6 µW/m² target and the Seletun Scientific Panel’s 170 µW/m² proposal. Though different, each is substantially below prevailing U.S. limits. HHS should examine international research and disclose funding sources and industry conflicts. Testing one device alone does not represent real life. People may be exposed simultaneously to phones, Wi-Fi, towers, Bluetooth, smart meters, wearables, and neighboring transmitters. HHS should standardize long-term measurements in bedrooms, classrooms, workplaces, and neighborhoods. Questions 9–11 — Disclosure and Vulnerable Groups…

Read the full comment →

Greetings, I'm Joshua Tosella, author of the book HOLY HYGIENE: Don't Get Sick. I have a lot to say about 5G. 5G causes very serious side effects in me, including nosebleeds, severe ED, blurry eyesight, mood swings, tiredness, depression, shrinking veins, choking on my own spittle and fluids, etc... The nosebleeds were the worse because they were so bad, I lost my HVAC business because of it. I even got cancer! I know for a fact it's the 5G causing it because I've run hundreds of tests and experiments. I was first able to determine my nosebleeds were caused by my phone, by simply turning off my phone. I was at my wits end searching for the cause of my symptoms and turning off my phone was actually one of the last things left to try. So I did it, and to my surprised, my nosebleeds stopped! To make sure, at great risk to my health, I turned my phone back on to see if my nosebleeds would come back and they did! I did this same simple experiment many many times to make sure 100%, that my nosebleeds were in fact being caused from my phone, and I can confirm after hundreds of tests that my phone was 100% casing my nosebleeds! Needless to say, at the time, I assumed all phones did that, so I had to keep my phone turned off and I lost all my customers, and then eventually had to give up my HVAC aspirations. After even further experimentation, I narrowed the cause of my nosebleeds and other medical issues, to 5G SPECIFICALLY! I did this by using the same method. I attempted to turn only my 5G off on my phone but left my phone on... I did this by manually switching my phone to the 4G-LTE network in settings. To my astonishment, my nosebleeds and other medical symptoms stopped, just as they did when I turned my phone off! Which clearly meant it was 5G specifically, causing my nosebleeds and other medical issues! So, the 4G-LTE network is obviously the safe network, when the 5G network is clearly dangerous or even a weapon, as I suspect! My life has been turned upside down because of this. As you might imagine, I had to stay away from everyone because their phones would cause serious medical issues for me like nosebleeds. I couldn't have friends, go to gatherings, or even…

Read the full comment →

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 someone in community with people who experience EMF sensitivity.

Given the rate to which wireless infrastructure has expanded over the course of the last 20 years, I'd be interested in learning more about the way that these systems affect the communities that house their infrastructure. What are the long term impacts of these gradual, environmental exposures?

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 and families with an opportunity to be heard.

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 parent and concerned member of the public. I would like HHS to conduct research on the effects of wireless exposure. The studies that were done on exposure to wireless devices were conducted 30 years ago. Since then, the higher frequency radiation exposure has increased and the effects on animals, insects, children, and teenagers are unknown. There are large cell phone towers next to the local high schools in our town. The teenagers, teachers, and administrators that work and attend the schools are exposed to this daily. Plus, teenagers and children are using Chromebooks and iPads instead of textbooks or whiteboards so that is even more wireless exposure. We are not sure what this is doing to developing brains and research needs to be done to see what this exposure is doing to their physical and mental health.

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 and families with an opportunity to be heard.

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.

Bonjour je suis un survivant des réseaux FM Satanique ainsi que mes deux garçons aussi victimes et sous contrôle coercitif de ma famille.

Je suis également un électro sensible , attaqué par les ondes depuis plusieurs années.

J' utilise un crayon tactile pour ne pas toucher mon téléphone mais malgré tout, cela me donne une sensation de brûlure qui peut durer plusieurs heures.

Je suis partagé entre le besoin social de communication et l' envie de participer à l' éveil dans ce monde en devenir.

J' aimerais avoir reconnaissance de cette difficulté face aux ondes et avoir la possibilité de vivre loin de cette pollution.

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

EM fields can effect the biology.

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.

Radiation is extremely harmful and bad, but some people, like you, love it though, which is probably why you work with cell towers. Am I right?? It causes harm when anyone is NEAR it. It often kills people way before cancer does! What's not to love right?? You remember when your family member had cancer??? Just think how overjoyed they will be and other people when you tell them you're putting up more radiation towers! You'll be very popular.

Hey newsflash!! Please put the cell towers next to the massive data centers located in the middle of nowhere, AWAY FROM PEOPLE. It's not difficult to see that radiation will seriously hurt or kill others. You don't want people to have serious health issues do you? And if you don't care or it's "out of your hands", you can start caring and realize none of this can happen without the very people you're trying to destroy with cell phone radiation .

"Oh I got cancer but I have the best phone reception ever!" Said the cell tower people and then the citizens. "Let me call my mom to tell her I have cancer now."

By the way, how are you all not being jailed or penalized for all these crimes against humanity?? It's not how you start it's how you finish.

Nip it in the bud cause your harming your own brothers and sisters.. and stop causing havoc. Stop trying to fix things that don't need improvement. You are making this into a frankencountry with franken-people. Stop giving your life to Satan. He's a liar and you WILL NOT receive immortality for all these wrong doing that YOU KNOW ARE WRONGDOINGS IN YOUR HEART. Why not? Cause God has already won. It's already written and closed. And He will not let anything happen that is not for His glory. Decide who's side you're on. "If you're not with me, you're against me". God's Word from the Bible. Jesus said, "I am the light and the way, and no one comes to the Father except through me." Just wait but you better choose soon.... Here's an insight maybe you'll be able to figure out who belongs to God and who doesn't.... God does not punish those who don't belong to Him. So evil people will get away with evil things. God is still good and always will be good. He sometimes uses evil things for good. Don't put radiation around any people or houses!!!

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.