Children, schools & development

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 experience negative physical affects being close to wireless radiation. 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 the father of two children: Joel, seven and Bresly 12 years old. My wife and I didn't know any better at the time and left our kids use their wireless devices as they wished, as a result: Joel suffers from a constellation of symptoms from difficulty to concentrate to nose-bleeding ....and when we bring him to doctors they don't know how to diagnose or treat him. Bresly, at her young age is almost blind because her excessive use of wireless screens/devices. And we are "lucky" because our neighbor has cancer. We live within 110 meters of two cell towers and the vegetation here keeps dying and birds don't come to nest as before. In my opinion wireless technologies and devices should come with big radiation warnings.

I suffer from a physiological response to wireless technologies. This happens when I am in a strong wifi environment and if I stay too long near electromagnetic frequencies from standard electrical pulsations. I didn’t want to believe that my symptoms and suffering would be so clearly caused by such ubiquitous daily technologies but the facts have remained- I feel the intensity of pulsed electromagnetic waves. My symptoms are: insomnia, headache, increased and heightened tinnitus (ringing becomes more shrill), and an overall increase in anxiety. To alleviate my reactions/illness, I have learned to prepare for a specific environment. For example, when I enter a restaurant, I use an EMF meter to find the areas of least radiation. My house is hard-wired with ethernet cables providing my internet connections and I use a landline to communicate. I do own a cell phone but it is kept in airplane mode or off most of the time. My friends and family know about my condition and they do not keep their phones on around me. I can’t attend stadium concerts, games and events where I know all phones will be pulsing their signals so, I don’t go. Luckily, I own my home and I am not subject to others’ wifi signals that would occur were I living in an apartment building. What about those who can’t afford a home and are forced to live in an unsafe environment? Sadly, I have come to believe that our government does not care about people like me. They care about the profits made by Telecom and they continue to deny that my sub-group has validity. Despite the studies that show harm, the FCC has just continued to allow more transmitters at higher frequencies to be developed. These higher frequencies (4G, 5G, 6G, 10G) are currently causing damage to plants and wildlife while the Federal government just looks the other way. I urge the FCC to take me and the thousands of us (could be millions, with symptoms blamed on the wrong cause), seriously. We are disabled and are often unable to participate in general society. Today, it is hard to find a safe place where there are no EMFs. This is why many escape into a forest, living off grid and on the edge. The small cell antennas now being deployed in every conceivable location- schools, office buildings, churches (shouldn’t they be sacred and safe places?), and on people’s homes make life impossible for those suffering from EMR-S (Electro Magnetic Syndrome). Please, take action now and prevent more suffering. Thank you, Kelly Marcotulli

DIGITAL technology is pulsed. Human and wildlife biology is accustomed to natural radio waves, and is not adjusted to the impact of intermittent pulses generated without relief from cell masts. Therefore, digital technology must be either superseded or used with the greatest precaution. THIS submission identifies four areas where there are gaps in necessary protection for long term public health, as follows: CELL masts capable of RF transmission are being installed in residential streets— # Without long term effects having been proven safe for human and wildlife health; and # Without reported adverse effects having been avoided or remedied; and # Without the democratic agreement of residents living within reach and sight of the technology; and # Without adequate monitoring of transmission levels. THE regulatory authorities are failing to protect human and wildlife wellbeing in those four ways. Through disregard of public wishes, the FCC is denying the public control of our own health. ISSUES of public concern regarding positioning of cell masts in residential areas: # The telecom companies are not required to remedy loss of good health, nor pay for shielding materials to avoid effects, nor compensate loss of pleasure in life. # There is no provision for the public to have rights of objection to the choice of site for a cell mast, nor rights to compensation and fair settlement. # Recourse to legal processes is beyond the means of most households. That is, the costs of shielding materials, re-designing bedrooms where children sleep, and “leaving all fair” should fall on the telecommunication companies and not on the householder.

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. I am pleased that 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. It is so important to require 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. I can remember reading the package insert of instructions when our cell phones were 2 and 3 G, and we were instructed not to keep the phone to the ear and to use an ear piece to have a conversation on the phone. I've seen my partners phone tells you when you are holding the phone too close. Obviously it is noted that wireless radiation can affect one's health. My daughter's children always had difficulty sleeping, when she lived next door to me in Long Beach, New York, her children now sleep much better at night since she moved out of New York on top of a mountain in North Carolina where the nearest tower is 3 miles away. She moved 4 years ago and her children then were 4, 7 and 10, so they were not infants when they had difficulty sleeping. I also have difficulty sleeping at night. but we have a house in the Adirondacks and I sleep great there, I hear a constant hum here in Long Beach. It is not tinnitus. I am an RN and I know the difference. The hum is not inside my head. It comes from outside and being that I also am a musician, I needed to hum to myself to match the note sound and it is an F sharp on the lower end of the piano give or take a 1/4 note. It hasn't changed the note since I've been noting it. I wired my household desk top computers to ethernet and turned off the wi- fi, to diminish the exposure while I'm on the computer, however of course I still have wifi in the house for TV and phone use. And the low hum is constant all day and night. I use a phone case with an EMF radiation barrier. I don't know how much it helps, but I know there are devices that help block the radiation. Perhaps the towers can be housed in a blocking radiation structure. I do know in the medical field we recommend not keeping cell phones close to the body or in pockets, especially for couples going through fertility treatments. So it seems it is known that EMF radiation does negatively affect the body. The big question here is how much do we let corporate greed dictate policy impacting all of humanity in a negative way. Thank you for your reaching out to Americans for their experiences and hopefully you can devise and implement ways to protect us. Lori Field, RN

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 am concerned for the safety of my family, friends and students/coworkers at the elementary school where I am employed. I have seen the behavior and mental health of my students decline once they were assigned one-to-one wireless devices. Children are using wireless devices at school and at home for excessive hours daily. We have a student in Children's Hospital undergoing treatment for a deadly cancer that normally affects senior citizens. Our electric company Eversource is currently replacing meters with smart meter and I am concerned about the effects on students and staff being bombarded 24/7 with more RF. 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 submitting this comment in response to FCC’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of an individual, retired Registered Veterinary Technician, parent, and human being. During January 2020, my family and I were sick with what seemed like a bad chest cold with cold/flu like symptoms. This was at the exact same time that AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile were all firing up their many 5G towers around the California central valley where I lived at the time. This was right after thousands of 5G towers were fired up in and around Wuhan China in September/October 2019 causing cold/flu-like “covid” symptoms”. I have also worked from home using a laptop computer and wifi router which caused me symptoms of irritability, anxiety, depression, dizziness, headaches, nausea, heaviness in the chest, fatigue, sleep disturbances, tinnitus and other cold/flu-like symptoms. Once I took out the router my symptoms improved but it wasn’t until I left my job to move out of state and was no longer working on a computer for 40 hours a week that I really started feeling better. I have had these same symptoms whenever I spend any time in a residence or building that has wifi and/or a large amount of electronic equipment, like the San Joaquin County building where the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors meet. I and others were sick for several days after spending hours waiting for my turn to speak in a Planning Commission meeting to address a legal matter regarding an illegal cell tower contract by the San Joaquin River Club where I used to live. I have also worked in several veterinary emergency hospitals with a lot of electronic equipment including fluid pumps, ultrasound machines, laboratory equipment and a CT scanner which caused irritability, anxiety, etc. I currently live in a low EMF environment which has really helped to alleviate my symptoms of Electromagnetic Radiation Sickness/Syndrome. I recently had an experience in which I had to gave my iPhone 16 on my person for at least 8 hours during the day because I was waiting for an important phone call in a town with several cell towers and 5G service. By the time I got home and no longer needed to have my phone on, I felt ill like I had the “flu”. I felt nauseous, had a headache and had to go to bed early. It took a couple days to get back to normal. I support FCC taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation and finally updating the 1996 guidelines. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge FCC to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

Please create meaningful EMF standards. Good effects will redound in human health and our beloved natural world, and will stimulate our economy. Of course you are familiar with the U.S. National Toxicology Program’s 2018 “most extensive study to date,” determining that cell phone emissions cause tumors in male rats and DNA damage. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones/index.html?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=prod&utm_campaign=ntpgolinks&utm_term=cellphone Immediately addressing the exposure of our school children seems a natural priority. My own story: Awareness of EMF sensitivity came to me after 54 years of age. Perhaps that’s when SmartMeters and a nearby Verison hotspot came in, or — as effects are cumulative — maybe that’s when my bucket overflowed, so to speak. My sensitivity spiked on a single day, after a medical test that day. Thereafter, there was no place in my house I could sleep before purchasing a sleep canopy — which is fragile, difficult to maintain, and does not stop all EMFs. And I continued to lose health from daytime exposure. I had a breast cancer operation in 2008, and was diagnosed with Hashimoto’s disease thereafter. I sold that house and moved. As you doubtless know, there are many, many symptoms which vary per human body and source, focus, direction, timing, and power of signal or flow. I seem sensitive to all three types of EMFs. Inability to sleep and feeling unwell are perhaps the words to describe my most abiding symptoms. Before selling my unhealthy house, from which I couldn’t move before finding a healthy place, I got down to 88 pounds (height 5’5”) despite eating 5000-6000 calories a day. After four years of recovery in a healthy-EMFwise location, seldom venturing into the world, I’m back at 120 pounds and feeling good. Hashimotos disease has disappeared. But my EMF sensitivity continues to grow, despite my seeking medical and energetic cures. I am unable to withstand exposure in work places, so I can’t work; a doctor exempted me from jury duty; I am grateful for protective film in my car windows. I laugh: I am one of the few to benefit from Covid precautions; six feet of distance in checkout lines makes others’ cell phones easier to bear. Monetary costs are of course significant: selling and buying houses, cancer treatment, seeking medical remedies to EMF harms, being unemployed. One knows that my new house may become untenable too, since the telecommunications industry calls the shots. I know others who are EMF sensitive. One is housebound at 50. Others don’t want it known that they are sensitive or feeling unwell, beset, pained. One of my silent EHS friends is an M.D. Another is a school official. I imagine that these standards would limit most stringently the harmful frequencies currently in common use (frequencies originally used, as I hear, in military weapons research). If I were in your position, I would favor the building biology guidelines for dwellings and places where children or the sick congregate. Knowing that those limits will be exceeded many places, work toward safety would be done in stages, first with no new installation or upgrades permitted in impacted areas; second with phased reductions in permitted output of damaging EMFs. Much more healthful frequencies exist, and technological improvements to favor health can offer great economic opportunities and environmental improvement. Some healthier options are already available, but cannot compete against the entrenched practices while those are allowed to set the standard. I wish courage, far-sightedness, and compassion to attend you in your considerations.

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: As a beekeeper, I have personally seen the effects of 5g wireless radiation on our pollinators. We had a 5g tower installed less than 5 miles away several years ago. After the towers installation, I began to have excessive bee colony deaths over the winter. This had not been an issue with my colonies prior to the towers installation. In addition, to the bee losses, I began to experience an increase in headaches when at home. As a nurse, I began to do research and learned there is emerging evidence of the health implications for both animals and humans from 5G technology. I was appalled at how communicatuons companies and the FCC have failed to conduct any independent research on the effects of their technology! This is unacceptable! Further, the towers are unsightly and decrease property values and are bypassing any resident input on their placement. 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.

Besides tinnitus proliferation and NEPA requests last decade to FCC for studies showing EMF safety, which both "bought" parties blew off for profit..... re Cell phone EMF’s (ElectroMagnetic Frequencies) and their serious impacts I sort of jokingly initially referred to the problems of isolation, narcissism, "anti-"social media vs actual direct communication, general dumb-downing, etc., initiated primarily by intro of common cell use in the early 2000's, by referencing the owners’ "addicting" cell phones ( which I call StupidPhones or ViewBlockers and do not use, while I do LOVE safe hardwired fiber optics and internet). It was only a few months ago now that I changed my own thinking about that somewhat meant to be a "teasing " term, "addictive". This is when I fully realized that these people are truly ADDICTED, and denial is one of the MAIN signs of addiction. Hence the question I have been too often asked, "How can you possibly live without one???" is not a casual sort of joke, but an honest but unacknowledged admission of genuine addiction. I have shared the following info with c 150+ different individuals and organizations and only 2 have ever brought the subject back up to me, one a lawyer friend, now convinced, who has argued in front of the Supreme Court in the past, and another, a nationally renowned ornithologist who said he would now add this threat to insects, in particular, outlined below to his already existing list of 1) habitat loss , 2) overuse of herbi-pesticides (which I have battled against alone and with my students for decades), and 3) climate change (a pathetically self-exculpatory abstracted term for those in our world-exploiting “consumer culture”) From a recent search "EMF harms to Insects" PLENTY to look at..... if one looks Here are a first few This first one below reiterates the dearth of focused newer studies ( due to unwillingness of cell addicts, + Telecom influence to obfuscate and squelch). My "anecdotal" evidence of YEARS (2009 until 5G arrival in early '23) of ALWAYS seeing probably hundreds of honey and other bees, + other insects, EVERY time I would go on a run through our burbs on all the yr round flowering plants or other insects around lights at night here is, in our poor at self-examination anthronarcissistic culture, unfortunately worth little. These days since early '23, I sometimes see ZERO insects on say a similar to the past heavily flowered 9 mile jaunt. Now I revel if I see 1 dragonfly or butterfly or one bat or maybe YAY even a few honeybees, usually only on one out of many nearby blooming plants, such as an in bloom Texas Ranger, which since my arrival here in 2001 always were formerly adorned with happily foraging bees. Much referenced in this article, that sounds horrible to me already, uses phrases such as "deserves further research of such and such type ". Denial and addiction hahah ! Even the "old" and "not focused" or dismissed as 'irrelevant' studies are so troubling to me that I can SO easily see how the cell industry has capitalized on human's fascination with and addiction to these devices as OVERWHELMINGLY and quickly as possible, while practicing what I call omitformation... just like with tobacco, the covid mRNA shots, or Roundup, or petro and global warming etc Don't LIE, OMIT just leave out and obfuscate anything that might deter profit. And with those amounts of $, one can buy all sorts of elections, legislation, appointees, rules, permits, loopholes, subsidies, etc. while ignoring any adverse science and ramming through basically untested tech. Take the $ and run before you have to (maybe) pay up later when the truth emerges ( eg Bayer Monsanto and current glyphosate settlements) The worst examples of fox guarding the hen house. The Telecom bought and dominated FCC rammed through 5G with virtually ZERO safety testing. Biological effects of electromagnetic fields on insects: a systematic review and meta-analysis and https://ehtrust.org/new-scientific-review-insects-threatened-by-emfs-including-5g-and-cell-tower-and-wireless-radiation/ and I do not always agree with all Mercola puts out, but value the work he does to collate and reference his sources This also, I think, talks about often poohpoohed EMF sensitivity in humans? https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2024/04/14/health-risks-of-5g.aspx?ui=93a5ed18b3438ac769725b337148474558c3bc7313758107668f5eef905cd1e6&sd=20170417&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20240414_HL2&foDate=false&mid=DM1557196 here are the links to the beekeeper association's' related studies I shared out a few yrs ago, now 3 yrs old https://www.beeculture.com/electromagnetic-radiation-part-1/ https://www.beeculture.com/electromagnetic-radiation-part-2/ Not sure exactly where I have also read about re cell radiation links to ADHD ( finally ! as I watched my students dumb down and lose focus since cell proliferation, even the very brightest we might send off to Exeter et similis), to hormone disruption in all animals, interference with plant cycles, various cancers from extra close regular exposure ( a small but well done study of Israeli electrical workers) etc etc .. NO PROBLEM HERE !!! just Scroll away and ignore wherever you are and whomever you might be with and your impact on the planet ! (why I call them ViewBlockers) $$$$$$$$$$ "normal" see... we "All" do it ! As I have mentioned to many before I believe, although I'd be happiest with close to zero cell EMF bombardment, the bees etc "seemed" OK with yrs of just 3 and 4 G and the same stupid overuse of herbicides and pesticides I have battled against for years that has not changed significantly since 5 G arrival. .......and more "anecdotal" evidence. when far enough away from urban sub-urban 5G's limited range of blanketing , say out at Corn Creek DNWR HQ miles from the expanding burbs (still !) or out in the wilderness desert and mts near me, I still see more insects. ( hard to believe but supposedly there are over 700 species of bees native to our Clark County !!!! must be some awesome specialization) PLENTY to see ......If one wants to look into all this, which virtually "NO ONE" seems willing to do, " Enough bad news already ?? vs learning anything negative about my "convenient" cell phone security blanket ?" Thanks Scott PS Although THEY will not tell you this , apparently your own cell phone emits its most dangerous EMF radiation levels when you have lowest bars as it is not receiving enough EMF's from elsewhere to connect.....please use speaker phone especially then ! Be well !