All comment threads

I am sensitive to wireless radiation. Over the last few years my sensitivity is getting worse. I get headaches are increasing in severity. I have insomnia - much worse with wireless on, lessoned when I can turn wireless off - at least in my apartment, however I am unable to block wireless from the neighboring houses. Everything seems worse now - allergies seem to be increasing in severity, and when I am sick with the flu, those symptoms are also worse. I attibute the worsening of symptoms to be the direct result of the increase in wireless radiation - as I can see increases in the amount of wireless networks available in my neighborhood and my local area. Wireless radiation harms people. I am older - and I see the effects. What is is doing to our children?

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

Re ET Docket No. 13-84: Radiofrequency is a known carcinogen, the closer, the more health risks. RF can heat biological tissue and cause tissue damage. We are in a constant cloud of wireless signals that could pose risks. We look to the FCC and other government agencies to PROTECT us from the harm. Shrugging shoulders and thinking, it's worth the risk to have this or that luxury, is not what we seek from our protectors. We want none of our loved ones to suffer because the government was too lazy to protect us. We want none of our biological tissues damaged because someone was unwilling to prioritize our health. Please be at the forefront of acknowledging this can pose risks and fight against it.

When is the FCC going to quit ignoring the August 13, 2021 win? Losing a son and investigating many other 'school cancer clusters' this can no longer be ignored! The FCC has not followed the court orders of, and since, 2021. Wireless radiation has been proven harmful and industry must be held accountable. The FCC has been captured both by industry and the ITU-BDT (Technology Development Bureau). Quit kicking-the-can down the road. Our children's lives are at stake with schools filled with wireless. The most vulnerable of our population are suffering, without the knowledge of the symptoms. Doctors need to be aware. If these federal agencies are not going to do their job, then step aside and let the experts do theirs! This must stop!

Hello. I am writing concerning 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, much of which is unknown due to lack of safety testing. The health and wellbeing of humans should take precedence over the wealth of the cellular and internet industries. 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. This is unacceptable. They seem to be only concerned with money, not human health. 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. Wireless radiation poses a threat to all life. Some people, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN, are more susceptible to the health risks associated with wireless radiation and it's the job of the ADULTS to protect them, not the profits of those who incentivize with $$$.

Since the City of Austin installed two smart meters on our house, which back up directly to the bed wall of our bedroom, I have not been able to sleep normally, as I have all my life. I bought an EMF meter to determine the level of RF/ microwave radiation, and in our bedroom it was far higher than the level considered safe, with peaks that are orders of magnitude higher still, occurring 24-7-365. I installed faraday fabric on the wall behind our bed, and the RF/ microwave level dropped considerably, although it was still high nearest the wall. My wife and I believe this entire wireless 'revolution' is damaging to human health and well-being. We urge strong regulation of this industry to rein in industry abuse. Users have not been given the information needed to make decisions about wireless products.

I have been negatively impacted by artifical EMF's for the last decade. I can feel the impact on my body as it causes migraines, tinnutis, sensitivity to sounds, smells and vision. I also become extremely dizzy and cannot form clear thoughts. I am unable to sleep or function when surrounding by them. During COVID the power company installed a smart meter on my house without any notice. Therefore I couldn't opt out before it was installed. The 30 days it was on my home was the sickest I had ever been. I couldn't get out of bed and I couldn't form coheisive sentences or thoughts. I had a debilitating migraine for those 30 days. I had to send an official letter from an attorney to have it removed and a digital meter put on instead. There was no way for me to receive my analog, non-transmitting meter back. There is sufficient evidence of the dangers of artifical EMF however profit seems to be put over health of humans time and time again. I vehemently oppose any smart technology and the increased use of EMF we are exposed to that we cannot opt out of.

I have a friend who is allergic to fluorescent lights. This has severely limited the kinds of work she can do: she has worked outside, even in winter, for many years. I myself am allergic to smart phones. They make me feel wired, vibrating in a hyper, weird way. I got rid of my smart phone and use my stupid phone just for emergencies. Fortunately I have control over my emf exposure. What about those who don't?

The FCC was under a court order with EHT v. FCC (Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission) to review pulsed microwave emission standards BACK IN 2021! It is 5 years later and the FCC has still not done nothing to address that court order. Are we a nation of laws or are we not? This type of breakdown of the Constitutional framework does NOTHING to instill confidence in government and its agencies. It leads to distrust and suspicions of agency capture by the very industries the FCC is supposed to be regulating. IT IS TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING Remember that YOU and YOUR FAMILIES are also affected by the pulsed microwave radiation soup we are all swimming in. I look forward to this court order being addressed with INTEGRITY.

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. This issue matters to me personally because: I was diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer at the age of 41 and given 3 months to live by my doctors. My husband and I had 4 year old twin daughters at the time. We were devastated. We had an environmental assessment done at our home and discovered that the wireless phone base station we had placed next to my desk to the right of my computer screen was putting off radiation that was off the charts. And my tumor was one my right side just a foot or two from the base station. Before cancer, we were unaware of the harms of RF radiation. We assumed as most people do that our government would not allow devices that caused serious harms. Fortunately I survived my cancer that would otherwise have devastated my children and husband. It’s imperative that the FCC take extreme care in allowing 5G and other devices to be placed near people’s homes and properly test devices we all use to make sure they do not cause cancer and other serious harms. 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.