All HHS comments · page 330

This is a copy of the comment I sent to the FCC. I reiterate it here for your agency. The same applies to HHS, which should be doing it's job, but has not been protecting us! ------

EMFs can and are doing harm to us in the US. Your job is to regulate industry and the devices they are placing in the marketplace, all around us, and in and on our homes.

You have not been doing your job. All other countries around the world have set regulations on the amount of bad and heavy EMFs coming from cell towers, smart meters, cell phones, and other devices.

How is it that this country is just a free-for-all giving a pass to anything the tech industries want to do?

It is because industry owns our FCC. And we have had enough of it!

I am not going to post any links of science or data for you here. You have the data. many have been telling you for years, decades!

People are being harmed, and you know it!

We could have functional devices, achieving all they are doing now, without utilizing these harmful frequencies. Your job is to protect us and restrict the harmful frequencies while allowing only those which are safer. DO IT!

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns.

Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns.

Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns.

Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”

I am submitting this comment as a concerned member of the public urging HHS to undertake a comprehensive, independent investigation into the potential human and environmental health effects of the rapidly expanding electromagnetic environment created by modern technology. My concern is not based on the assumption that every wireless technology has been proven harmful. Rather, it is that society has dramatically increased the intensity, density, duration, proximity, and variety of electromagnetic exposures while the long-term biological consequences of this cumulative exposure remain incompletely understood. Today, people can be exposed simultaneously and continuously to Wi-Fi, 4G/5G and future 6G infrastructure, cell towers and small cells, Bluetooth and wireless headphones, smartphones, smart meters, wireless cameras and security systems, wearables, smart-home devices, connected and electric vehicles, wireless medical devices, satellite communications such as Starlink, and the rapidly expanding infrastructure supporting AI and data centers. The central question should therefore not simply be whether each individual device complies with an existing exposure limit. HHS should determine whether current standards adequately address real-world, cumulative, lifelong exposure from multiple sources operating simultaneously. I respectfully ask HHS to investigate potential effects on: sleep and circadian biology; hormonal and endocrine function; reproductive health and fertility; pregnancy and fetal development; neurological and cognitive function; immune and metabolic function; oxidative stress and cellular signaling; DNA integrity, repair and epigenetic processes; cancer and other chronic diseases; and children and other potentially vulnerable populations. Research should specifically examine effects that may occur below existing exposure limits and should evaluate frequency, power density, modulation, pulsing, duty cycle, beamforming, proximity to the body, duration, and simultaneous exposure to multiple frequencies. HHS itself identifies these factors as important areas for investigation. I am particularly concerned about involuntary residential exposure. Smart…

Read the full comment →

See attached file. It is absolutely amazing that HHS is compiling these long overdue comments. Thank you so much!!!

I have been dealing with EMF issues for 6 years now. I'm 76yrs old and have a 90 yr old husband that I have been trying to take care. There is so much to eexplain. But. Unfortunately I can't be on this cell phone long enough. But thank God your doing research. Maybe people like me will get some help with the EMF issues. I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy!

Comment on Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397

Perspective (Q1): Individual / adult educator in a community Lifelong Learners setting. Not a physician. I teach practical exposure-reduction, not products.

Q8 — What should be disclosed

People need plain-language facts at the point of use: phones are radio transmitters; distance drops exposure sharply; night-time household wireless can be switched off; wearables and routers add to the load even when you are not “on a call.” Federal consumer and school guidance should say that in one page, without a store attached.

Q10 — Sensitive populations

Exposure assessment should treat children, pregnant women, and those with implants or unexplained symptoms as groups that may need extra caution while the science is incomplete — not as proof of a single disease. Schools and childcare should have the option of wired connections and phones stored off the body.

Q11 — Evidence below current U.S. limits

IARC classified RF electromagnetic fields as *possibly carcinogenic to humans* (Group 2B, 2011). The National Toxicology Program reported tumor findings in male rats after long-term RF exposure. The D.C. Circuit in *Environmental Health Trust v. FCC* (2021) found the FCC had not adequately explained its decision to retain 1996-era limits in light of subsequent evidence on children and long-term exposure. Those three items are enough to justify a current HHS evidence review. They are not, by themselves, a diagnosis of any person.

Q15 — Research priorities

Highest gaps: real-world *cumulative* exposure (phone + Wi-Fi + infrastructure), non-thermal biological endpoints, pediatric and in-utero cohorts, and independent replication of NTP-type work at current waveforms (including 5G). Coordination: NIH for biology, FDA for device emissions and labeling, CDC for school/community guidance.

Practical recommendation

While agencies update the science, HHS can publish the same three habits already used in many public-health pages: increase distance, take the phone off the body, turn household transmitters down or off at night. That does not require a new standard to be finished first.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

I have been debilitated by 5G technology on several occasions. I was parked in Sausalito, California enjoying an ocean view at a park and ride when I suddenly could not think, it was as if I was in a stupor. My psychology was scrambled and nothing made sense in that moment. I had the presence of mind to get out of my car to get fresh air, and noticed there there were several towers, both 5G and cellular towers.

I frequently see clients in their homes, and one client has a very powerful Xfinity modem. When I am in the room that has the modem, negative thoughts race through my mind, then my whole body heats up and it stays heated until I turn off the modem.

When I drive on the 101 freeway and pass a 5G tower, I can feel prickly sensation on my skin in different parts of my body and it definately changes my psychology for the worst.

There is no safety data for this technology, there will never be safety data because it has been proven over and over again that this technology is toxic to humans.

My dad ended up dying of brain cancer. He was left-handed and he got the brain tumor on the left side of his head near his ear where he held his cell phone and all of us are convinced that's why he got brain cancer. In many ways wireless radiation really ruined my life. I have MCS multiple chemical sensitivity and everybody like me has a lot of problems processing chemicals and a sensitivity to electromagnetism. Usually they display one of the two a little bit more than the other one, but both sensitivities are always both present and no one seams to knows why. I have to pick houses based on how far they are away from the cell towers. Trying to get at least 2 miles away is almost impossible now and I use this website called antennasearch.com to help me. I can't be in the room with wireless routers and I always plug in the ethernet of my computer to avoid Wi-Fi because it really hurts me. When I was younger, I didn't feel electromagnetism and slowly overtime It's become a huge problem in my life. I don't know if I just have heavy metal toxicity and it's resonating inside me or what happened. For all of human history humans were only exposed to background radiation and then we upped that by billions of times and expected that there was no consequence when there really was. The thermal threshold argument for wireless safety clearly doesn't apply to me because it ruined my life. In the future we can use quantum physics and entanglement to do all the things we're doing wirelessly but without the non-ionizing radiation that's hurting me so eventually we might grow out of this problem. I remember seeing people that were studying all of these worms underneath a giant leaf and how all 30 worms would curl and uncurl all together and the people studying it thought it was some mating ritual or some thing, but then they realized it was actually a radar tower and whenever it's spun around and was facing the worms from miles and miles away is when they all would curl up at the same time and then they would uncurl when the radar faced away from them as the radar dish turned around. Wireless technology creates a magical and convenient world, but unfortunately it comes with…

Read the full comment →

I have a 5G tower placed near my home in the country 2 years ago and since then have developed random headaches and insomnia with no previous history of either. All health tests done render me healthy and doctors have no understanding of where these symptoms are coming from. Strangely, we go camping far north every end of summer for a couple of weeks with no towers anywhere and my symptoms are no longer. How can being in the vicinity of a 5G tower & having symptoms, and then being outside of any tower's reach which brings relief from said symptoms not induce inquiry? No type of technology is worth the degradation of even one life, but many lives are at risk because these towers are so numerous everywhere now. Are we as a country willing to say that we knew that people were being negatively affected and looked the other way? Wasn't it Theodore Roosevelt that said "The man who knows the truth and has the opportunity to tell it, but who nonetheless refuses to, is among the most shameful of all creatures' God forbid that we should ever become so lax as that." EMFs are damaging the cells of every body and no one can escape unscathed. So many things that happen in this world are out of our control, but this can be regulated and can be improved.

As a Lived Experience Expert in EMF Sensitivity, I represent a growing population of patients sickened by our ever-growing blanket of EMF & RF exposure. For over two years now with the onset exacerbated by fiber optics installation and Smart Meter installation on my house, in addition to the endless Cell Towers in our neighborhood, my health declined drastically. Allopathic practitioners seem to lack knowledge to deal with this growing issue. So, seeking healthcare is useless. This growing concern includes the co-morbid conditions that sometimes present with EMF Sensitivity, like chemical sensitivity. The daily struggle to use devices like cell-phones or Wi-Fi connected devices is devastating. The remediation efforts in my own home have helped minimally with keeping symptoms at bay. They include Hard wire internet and a non-Wi-Fi router, and No Wi-Fi appliances. My symptoms include debilitating neurological, sensory, and physiological. In 2022 the National Council on Disability Framework included "#6.Provide mandatory industry guidance, including recommended policies, training and best practices, to address the needs of people disabled by exposure to low level chemical, electromagnetic, and other environmental exposures that preclude access to care and treatment at medical, dental and at other providers’ offices, hospitals, surgical centers, and other healthcare and healthcare–related facilities, as a result of their use of chemical, fragranced and other scented products, and also as a result of the usage of wireless communications and electrical technologies and other sources of non-ionizing radiation, which may trigger disabling and life-threatening cardiac, respiratory, neurological, and other adverse physical reactions. (Requires administrative action through HHS Office of Civil Rights, and further research concerning this matter should be conducted by the FDA, NIH, HHS, and HUD.)" The 2006 project of the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) with funding support from The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) reported that “There are a significant number of people who are sensitive to chemicals and…

Read the full comment →

Dear HHS,

I am writing as an individual concerned about the potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation from wireless technology, including Wi-Fi routers and cell phones.

I first became aware of a possible connection between my own sleep and exposure to wireless radiation approximately ten years ago. I was visiting a friend who had placed a Wi-Fi router underneath the guest bed. My son and I were unable to sleep properly for three nights. When we discovered that the router was directly underneath the bed and disconnected it, we were subsequently able to sleep normally.

That experience made me much more attentive to my environment and to the possible effects of wireless exposure. Since then, I have devoted considerable time and effort to reducing wireless exposure in my home. I have even worked with a consultant who specializes in this area to help me create a wireless-free environment and reduce unnecessary exposure to wireless signals and cell phones.

I recognize that individual experiences do not, by themselves, establish scientific causation. However, I know from my own experience that I notice significant physiological effects, particularly with respect to sleep, when I am exposed to certain wireless environments. This has led me to believe that this subject deserves continued serious and independent scientific investigation.

I respectfully encourage HHS to look carefully at the existing research on electromagnetic radiation and wireless technologies and to support further research into possible physiological effects, including effects on sleep and other aspects of human health. I also believe it is important to listen to people who report experiencing symptoms or changes in their well-being associated with wireless exposure, even when the scientific understanding of those experiences remains incomplete.

Thank you for your attention to this matter and for providing an opportunity for members of the public to be heard on an issue that I believe deserves thoughtful scientific consideration.

Sincerely,

Lydia MacLear

My life has undergone a drastic change since the analog meter was removed from my home. I was suddenly overcome with a headaches, nausea and an inability to concentrate. Another member of my family had to constantly take naps and a third member suddenly experienced a rise in blood pressure readings. When the symptoms showed no signs of subsiding, I contacted my electric company and asked for the opt-out option. I naively believed that for a charge of 15 dollars a month, I would receive my analog meter back. No such luck! The company had a digital meter put onto my home (for a fee of about 44 dollars.) All my family members felt immediate relief when the smart meter was removed from our home. It soon became clear, however, that the non-smart digital meter was also causing us health issues. I phoned our electric company, again, and begged them to remove the digital meter and return our analog meter. They replied that the digital meter has no "RF" and is, therefore, no different in safety from the analog meter. No matter how many times I told them that I was experiencing a downturn in my health, they kept repeating that the safety profile of the digital meter is no different than the analog meter. When I called an EMF professional down to my house, (another 1,000 dollar fee), he confirmed that the dirty electricity from several outlets in my home were so high, they "maxed out" his meter! I had no choice but to spend thousands more dollars (about 3,000 dollars) on EMF protection, and, although, the problem has improved, it is still there. The meter has become a daily struggle in my life, and I, now, think of my life in terms of "before the meter" and "after the meter." I was in middle of writing a book before my analog meter was removed from my home, and even with EMF protection, I haven't been able to conclude the book due to fatigue and trouble concentrating. And to think that I am being fined 15 dollars monthly for a meter that is making me sick! Many people cannot afford expensive EMF protection or may not even connect their symptoms to their meters! I could only imagine how many other families are suffering. When I go outdoors, I often feel a metallic taste…

Read the full comment →

I call for strong public health protections - just about none exist today! - on health issues associated with electromagnetic radiation from cell towers and cell phones.

In 2021, in EHT v FCC, the court mandated the FCC must address the scientific evidence regarding wireless radiation impacts on humans and the environment. Since then, the FCC has done nothing! The last time there were health standards for wireless radiation was in the early 1990s – before many people even owned cell phones. The FCC would do well to look at Europe’s strong heath standards.

Meanwhile there are hundreds of studies that point to terrible health effects for all species on Planet Earth: humans and every other species on this planet. Electromagnetic radiation has proven to be toxic to insects, for example, and a major contributor to the extreme drop off in insect populations around the world.

There’s no longer an escape from wireless radiation – it’s everywhere on this planet. It’s long past time that we took action to protect humans and every other species.

The ability of electromagnetic frequencies (RF) to positively or negatively affect the human microbiome has been proven with very concrete scientific data ( https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-025-01227-1?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nrmicro ).

Our studies have also shown that probiotic bifidobacteria in the human gut respond positively to this frequency (https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.07762).

Furthermore, it is now known that environmental factors such as RF and wireless technology, in conjunction with microplastic exposure, increase the severity of gut dysbiosis (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-53842-2 ).

Therefore, the relationships between the gut microbiota, RF, and microplastics must be clearly elucidated.

​​​​​​​ HUSEYİN SANCAR BOZKURT MD,AGAF

​​​​​​​ sancarb79@gmail.com

​​​​​​​ Pendik Bölge International Hospital

​​​​​​​ Istanbul/Türkiye

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 who wants a safe beautiful world for my children and grandchildren.

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.

Hello, please see my attached letter. Thank you, Diane Muratore Testa, Ph.D.

See attached file(s) Please see attached document for my story.

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 parent animal advocate. The FCC is trying to pass laws that will allow the invasive placement of 5/6G towers in very critical animal habitat and next to residential homes.

Why did the United States government STOP testing the effects of these deadly frequencies? These frequencies have been shown to kill trees close to them, interrupt mating cycles of animals, sickness and DEATH!!!

There has been a 5/6G tower placed close by my house and ever since this happened, roughly a year ago, my ears are ringing off the charts.

STOP POISONING HUMANS AND ANIMALS WITH DEALY FREQUENCIES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN TESTED FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME! BAN THESE TOWERS THAT ARE NOT FOR BETTER CELL RECEPTION - THEY ARE SIMPLY A CONTROL MECHANISM FOR THE GLOBAL PLAN FOR SMART CITIES TO CONTROL AND TRACK EVERY PERSON ON EARTH!

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.

Sincerely from a Concerned American Patriot,

Dana Fortson