26110082350
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110082350

This comment is in regards to to FCC's reliance on outdated guidelines for radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure. Fact: The levels of electromagnetic output, and thus, exposure have increased every year. Fact: The FCC has not studied long term effects of increased exposure in regards to humans, flora or fauna. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. Here is one study I believe the FCC should review when addressing the concerns about wireless radiation: Levitt, Lai & Manville (2021): Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 1: Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment – Examined increasing environmental electromagnetic-field exposure and research concerning potential effects on wildlife, plants, and ecosystems. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: The life cycle of bees, in particular are crucial to our existence. The potential harm has not been measured in any meaningful way. We have anecdotal evidence of electromagnets improving the production of the hive. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.