ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. 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 just one study I believe the FCC should review when addressing the concerns about wireless radiation: BioInitiative Report (2012, with Subsequent Research Updates): Updated Research Summaries https://bioinitiative.org/updated-research-summaries/ – Collection of scientific research concerning neurological effects, oxidative stress, DNA damage, genetic effects, and electromagnetic sensitivity. Individual summaries have different update dates, including 2022. The 1996 limits rest on outdated thermal assumptions and ignore more than 500 studies showing non-thermal biological effects—oxidative stress, DNA damage, neurological harm, reproductive impacts, and effects on children and wildlife—at levels far below those limits. No adequate safety testing exists for modern pulsed, cumulative, or 5G exposures. Children, long-term residents, pets, and the environment remain unprotected. 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: I have experienced headaches, insomnia, tinnitus, heart rhythm changes, and various other effects from nearby cell towers, or when near cell towers and wireless sources. These symptoms are not isolated; they are consistent with non-thermal biological effects documented in the scientific literature and affect my daily health and well-being. As a certified wildlife rehabilitator, I have also seen and witnessed animals and birds of various types negatively harmed by proximity to these facilities. As a health counselor, I have seen and tried to help people with heart rhythm problems and irregularity, anxiety, stress, insomnia, tinnitus, head and body pain, headaches, migraines, and other common effects associated with these exposures. I do not consent to, and expressly withhold my consent for, any RF radiation, electromagnetic emissions, or wireless frequencies from cell towers, Wi-Fi routers, cell phones, or other wireless telecommunications facilities being directed at or towards me, my person, my family, my home, or my state and country. 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.