I am writing to urge the FCC to reexamine its radiofrequency (RF) exposure guidelines, with particular attention to the potential impact of wireless radiation on children and developing brains. The current FCC guidelines were developed nearly three decades ago, before the widespread use of smartphones, tablets, Wi-Fi-enabled classrooms, wearable devices, and the constant wireless connectivity that now defines daily life for many children. Today's children experience levels and patterns of exposure that were not contemplated when the current standards were adopted. Of particular concern is the growing body of scientific literature examining the effects of RF exposure during critical periods of brain development. For example, Aldad et al. (2012), a Yale University study published in Scientific Reports, found behavioral and neurodevelopmental changes in mice exposed to cellular telephone radiation during gestation. While no single study should dictate regulatory policy, such findings underscore the need for careful review of potential developmental impacts and should not be dismissed without meaningful consideration. Children are not simply smaller adults. They are undergoing rapid neurological development, and they may face a lifetime of cumulative exposure to wireless technologies. Yet there is little public information regarding the actual, real-world RF exposures children experience throughout the school day in increasingly wireless educational environments. Wi-Fi routers, laptops, tablets, smartphones, and other connected devices are now commonplace in classrooms, but the extent and characteristics of these exposures are rarely monitored or publicly reported. The FCC has a special responsibility to ensure that its regulations adequately protect vulnerable populations, including children and pregnant women. At a minimum, the Commission should conduct a transparent review of the current scientific evidence regarding children's health and neurodevelopment, explain how it evaluates studies reporting biological effects at non-thermal exposure levels, and determine whether additional safety factors or updated exposure limits are warranted. The question before the Commission is not whether wireless technology provides tremendous benefits. It unquestionably does. The question is whether exposure standards developed in the 1990s continue to reflect the best available science in a world where children are surrounded by wireless devices from infancy onward. The FCC should ensure that its regulations are based on current evidence and provide an appropriate margin of safety for the nation's children. Thank you for considering these comments.
Since the mandated installation of smart meters electric bills have skyrocketed and we have seen none of the promised savings or control over our electric usage. At this rate electricity will be a completely unaffordable luxury fit the next generation. Even now families of four making less than $133,609 are given subsides from the electric company paid for by the higher bills put on us all. This new smart system is only designed for failure as the meter life and replacement costs are unsustainable. Finally these meters were mandated with no safety testing to show the health effects on structure occupants and greater risk of fire. The only benefit is to the electric company who can now easily disconnect your power. That is not something we should be paying a premium for. Please return the safe, economical and trusted analog meters.