All comment threads

This filing was submitted as an attachment. Open the document below to read the comment.

Cell phones used to have to list their radiation output, I chose a phone with the lowest I could find at the time. Now they are not publishing this information and I am assuming are not required to do so. With all the environmental issues we are all having and no long term studies have been done we need to limit exposure to RF from towers, WiFi and cell phones, particularly phones since they are directly touching us and especially our heads. This must be limited and studied for the future health of our citizens.

Because of 5G, I can no longer use my cell phone as it is intended. It gives me MAJOR headaches if it is near my head, so I always have to have it on speaker in order to avoid the pain. This was NOT an issue prior to the 5G rollout...and now they are talking about 10G?! Without proper testing?! Yeah...no...I may have to find alternative ways to communicate.

I was having terrible pain at night over my heart, like a heart attack, and I felt like my inside was freezing cold many nights in a row. I started using an EMF blocker and the chest pain and cold sensation would go away. I was flying and I used my EMF blocker on the way to my destination. On my way home I forgot about it and started to have pain in the right side of my neck. I grabbed my EMF blocker and within 2 minutes the pain in my neck was gone.

This filing was submitted as an attachment. Open the document below to read the comment.

About four years ago, I had a sudden onset of heart palpitations and an irregular heartbeat. I couldn’t sleep at night and could only find relief when going outside of my house. I could not figure out the cause of the sudden change in my until-then perfect health. My doctor was at a loss, which caused me more anxiety. I researched my symptoms and discovered 5G was a cause for many people. I checked my wifi router and saw it had been changed to a 5G signal. I called my internet provider, and they told me they had “upgraded” my signal to 5G, for free, rather than the previous 2.4. It was immediately turned off, and the company representative told me several people had complained of heartbeat problems when in the vicinity of 5G signals. Now I experience problems when I visit people with 5G routers in their homes, some of which live in neighborhoods with 5G signals everywhere. It has effectively limited my ability to interact directly with people I care about. I also am unable to stay in most hotels and motels, so most traveling is out. I want the FCC to follow the direction of the court hearings that instructed the FCC to re-evaluate the outdated research regarding EMF radiation. Numerous studies by scientists with no monetary connections to the EMF industry have been conducted, and they contradict the current findings protecting the industry.

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. 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. 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.

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. My real world experience of wifi radiation impact on my health is current and ongoing; I've detailed it below. 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 was this past spring (2026) notified by my oncological nutritionist that the abrupt rise in my yearly a!C level likely is due to emf exposure. It shows pre-diabetes level 5.7, whereas my diet has kept it between 5.1 and 5.4 for many years, and I have not changed my eating plan this past year. The nutritionist showed me the current online map of cell towers and antennas within 3 miles of my Oakland home. 2300 plus antennas and about 1900 towers emit emf radiation which may be partly what's causing this. However most likely she said the worse source is my home wifi. In addition to blood sugar rise, I have insomnia and increasing tinnitus. So I've taken step one: hardwired my computer and dispensed with wifi. I've felt immediate relief, especially regarding the tinnitus. Will be interested to see results of my next a1C test later this fall. I am astonished that the FCC has let this situation get to this point in which people who are severely affected by the vast increase in efm radiation must make huge changes in their lives, including having to move. To me it's clear that emf has strong biological effects (beyond thermal) on humans (and animals, insects and plants). I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence we are submitting before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

It is unreasonable for the FCC to determine issues of health. The safety of any form of communication should be determined by disinterested qualified medical professionals. Otherwise we are subject to the wishes of business entities who want profit at any cost to public health.

I have had to move my office away from our college's technology help desk that I managed. Whenever I was working at the desk, I would feel a sense of brain fog that interfered with my work. I had difficulty performing my job because the brain fog interfered with my ability to concentrate. At home, I opted out of having a smart meter because it affected my heart, causing palpitations and irregular heartbeats whenever I was in the bedroom next to the meter. I have two grandsons who are very sensitive like myself, and I want to comment here in hopes of protecting them in the future from unwanted wireless EMR.