Sensitivity & health experiences

The FCC must become a proactive agency, placing Americans' health first before businesses and other objectives. Subsequently, amending current exposure limits to ensure safety is urgently needed. Independent experts concur that the 1996 RFR exposure limits remain ineffective because they were based on thermal heating of tissue, while ignoring lower frequencies. Studies based on thermal heating used a 200 lb male dummy and a water filled balloon for head exposure. Debilitating health effects occur at much lower frequency levels. Health impacts for pregnant women, babies, children and those working in fields with chronic exposures weren't included. Fast forward thirty years, and the amount of RFR emitting devices and ambient RFR levels has skyrocketed. The proliferation of cell phones, cell towers, 5G, 6G, antennas, WiFi, smart meters, and other smart products is unprecedented. No federal agency has assessed/evaluated the impacts on human health and our environment by addressing these combined multiple exposures. Major areas of concern include: impacts on children, the environment, EHS individuals and the cumulative, involuntary exposure most people encounter every day. As a grandmother, I'm extremely worried about the constant RFR exposure experienced by our children and its long term effects. Children are more susceptible to environmental harms as they are smaller physically and in the process of developing. Their skulls are thinner, allowing more radiation to penetrate. Many schools now default to wireless connectivity with no evidence of safety, subjecting our children to this invisible toxin daily.  An increasing number of people experience Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity due to current excessive exposure levels. This involuntary exposure while navigating work and/or public spaces is impossible to avoid.  Many individuals through repeated exposure develop hypersensitivity and must actively avoid all exposures. Personally, I find airports intolerable; I experience headaches, vision problems and brain fog that lingers for hours. My home is hard-wired with ethernet cables and I keep my cell phone on airplane mode when not in use. Additionally, unless a state has enacted a no-fee opt-out, involuntary exposures include Smart Meters, which emit continuous pulsed radiation. Independent testing of all devices should reflect real life usage. For example, cell phones are carried in pockets, next to skin, close to the face and head.  The US should implement the European Commission's new standard requiring cellphones to be tested for radiation while touching the body — which is how people actually carry and use cellphones: in a pocket or against the skin. Dr. Marc Arazi, Phonegate Alert's founder and president, stated that a recent court ruling represents an “historic victory for European consumer protection and the culmination of nearly 10 years of campaigning against cellphone radiation testing protocols that failed to reflect real-world conditions of use.”  The natural world is similarly affected. It is known that RFR radiation affects bees and migratory birds, disrupting their ability to navigate and forage effectively. Flora and fauna are known to experience die-offs in close proximity to cell towers. In 2021, Kent Chamberlin Chairman, Emeritus of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of New Hampshire concluded one of the key recommendations of the New Hampshire Commission to Study The Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology is that cell towers be placed no nearer than 1,640 feet from places where people live, work or recreate. This 500 meter setback should become immediate public policy. There should be an immediate moratorium on any new devices while safety studies are performed to evaluate the countless RFR emitting products already on the market.  European Union study finds children absorb more wireless radiation than adults across rangeof 5G frequencies - EHNhttps://www.ehn.org/5g-wireless-radiation-children-exposure 1 The FCC Is Supposed to Protect the Environment. It Doesn’t. https://www.propublica.org/article/fcc-environment-cell- towers-failures Environmental Procedures at the FCC: A Case Study in Corporate Capture (2022) 19 https://ehtrust.org/electromagnetic-fields-impact-tree- plant-growth/ 20 https://ehtrust.org/environmental-effects-of-wireless- radiation-and-electromagetic-fields/ 21 https://ehtrust.org/published-research-adverse-effect- wireless-technology-electromagnetic-radiation-bees/ 22 https://ehtrust.org/radiofrequency-radiation-effects-on- agronomy-agricultural-crops-and-crop-yields

Department of Health and Human Services - Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure FCC Seeks Comment on RF Exposure Issues Subject to D.C. Circuit Remand in Environmental Health Trust V. FCC - ET Docket No. 13-84 To the respectful and understanding reader, First of all, please don’t judge my English, as this is my secondary language. When I was young, my father working in the broadcasting industry, gave our family the love of technology. He believed, like everyone was told, that nnEMF were safe. Having seen a housing opportunity, our whole family moved to a house near huge electric pylons. I lived there for about 10 years. However, I started having health problems on the 5th years. Unfortunately, my father passed away on the 13th year and my mother a bit later, after moving away from this house. A few years later, I started having a permanent headache that wouldn’t go away. I would go to sleep with a headache, then wake up with a headache. I went for a CT Scan and they told me everything was "fine". But it wasn’t fine. Fortunately, I started to have some clues: - My permanent headache went away only when going in the forest, and came back gradually while reentering the city. It occurred a few time, but couldn’t understand the link between my headache and the forest. - A long lasting power outage of 5 days, which affected the whole neighborhood: no headaches during that time. Headaches came back as soon as the power went back on. This is the moment I understood my headache was linked to electricity, somehow. I wasn’t sure, though, having been told again and again that non-ionizing EMFs were totally harmless. Anyhow, having a better idea of the problem, I tried to get help from professionals. I thought they would know better than me. After getting next to no help from my doctor and about 7-8 health specialists, that is when I tried to find answers by myself. This led me to a long and enduring path of discovery toward the truth, both for personal and professional reasons. Being a product designer, I use a scientific, neutral and intuitive approach on almost all subjects. So, I did what I normally do when doing research: checking both sides of the argument and trying to spot inconsistencies and biases. I also learned in my career that if you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it. So I started buying various and increasingly expensive EMF meters, covering different frequencies. This led me to understand that there were wiring errors in my house. I also discovered how "noisy" are WiFi and Bluetooth devices. I then tried to turn those antennas off. My headaches went away almost immediately after. Finally, 3 years after the beginning of my permanent headache, I was making progress. As of today, almost 7 years after the beginning of my permanent headache, I did more than 3000 hours research of the subject of EMF of many ranges and sources in order to understand the subject thoroughly. From my understanding so far, the problem isn’t necessarily nnEMF themselves, but their overabundance. You might be familiar with this: we call that "electrosmog". Don’t get me wrong: I LOVE technology and wouldn’t want to quit my day to day job. It has just became very hard to practice under those conditions. So, my long term goal is to get to know and understand the subject as much as possible in order to create safer products that are respectful of biology, including humans, animals and plants, as I know now that those are affected too. Most of us just aren’t aware. In one line: all lifeforms runs on electricity. Electricity is data. Any change of frequency, energy and vibration is affecting cell at microscopic levels. Under weak non-ionizing nnEMF (WiFi, BT, 60Hz powerline, among others), it first affect blood cells (rouleau formation) after just 10 minutes of exposure but resolves by itself when it stops or if the subject is moving enough to activate blood circulation. However, if someone stand still while using those devices and that it happens all days over a year, bigger problems start appearing. That’s why most lab tests are failing to find evidence: their tests aren’t lasting nearly long enough to find those. The defining characteristic of nnEMF (non-native electromagnetic fields) is polarization. nnEMF are artificially generated and highly polarized, which changes how they interact with matter, and, in this case, with living tissue. Polarization forces ions to oscillate, which, through a cascade of events, forces calcium channels open (voltage-gated ones, yes, you read that right), driving calcium into cells. Excess calcium stimulates the production of nitric oxide (NO), which reacts to form peroxynitrite (ONOO⁻), a highly reactive and aggressive oxidant. Over time, this damages mitochondria, alters cell membranes, and ultimately causes DNA strand breaks. Here is a problem which you guys have the power to solve: as you know, all cells phones are tested for SAR. Their levels are tested against your own rules and they pass it before the product gets released to the public. This is fine by itself. However, when you go inside a cramped bus or subway, those numbers are suddenly going through the roof. Nobody is checking for exposure in those areas. That being said, there are other solutions, such as LiFi, which could be a good alternative. Also, making wireless frequency unpolarized might be another path to explore. Before concluding, I must admit though that speaking of this problem with other people wasn’t all good. Many people, including some close friends, didn’t want to believe my story. I had to insist to the point of this health problem nearly breaking our friendship. Thanksfully, I had more listening ears around me than judging ones. I also met many people having the same problem as me, which was a relief. Many people are downright hostile toward this unknown problem, as you might have noticed. From what I’ve found so far, what we were told since the 60’ hasn’t evolved much in the public mindset. I really hope it changes at last. Thanks for caring about all of this. Philippe D. Côté

ET Docket No. 13-84: I am writing because I have general and personal concerns and experience symptoms related to RF radiation and feel strongly regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. I understand 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. 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. I wholeheartedly believe that 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 – 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 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 unconscienable! I wholeheartedly 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 live near numerous cell towers and our home is increasingly being surrounded by the installations of numerous 5G, 6G, 8G local telecommunication networks, besides the smart meters of utiilty companies. I experience headaches, extreme fatigue and disorintation from even cell phone exposure for any length of time. I have gone through the trouble to purchase an EMF meter and tested areas in and around my home, our celll phone, our computer and TV to find the readings high on all counts, even after I have taken what measures I could to mitigate exposures. I suffer chronic fatigue, many and increasing allergies and a low immune system, which I believe to be in great part a result of constant EMF exposure. After living in our current home for over 30 years, I have seen a large decrease in the bird and bee populations and in the health of the backyard wildlife. I have witnessed heightened tensions, anxiety, depression and significant declining general health in the people of the neighborhood. I very strongly 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 is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. And 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 issue matters to me personally because my health has been adversely affected by wireless radiation, particularly after a smart meter was installed on the verandah outside my bedroom. The meter was installed in 2016/17. Over the approximately two years while it was there my health gradually deteriorated. Eventually, I became more ill than I had ever been in my life. In 2018 I came down with a bug that completely wiped me out for two months, along with a secondary eye infection. I could not work. My sleep had been affected for those one and a half to two years of the smart meter presence - waking, and then taking hours to get back to sleep. I experienced fatigue during the day. There was head pressure and I began to experience 'brain fog'. These things I initially assumed might just be part of my aging process (73 years old). My blood pressure was high when I did go to the doctor for the eye infection. I had been using a shungite sphere between the smart meter transmitting aerial and my bedroom, which I had thought would protect me, however I now feel it was not enough to deal with the quite strong emr transmissions coming 24/7 from the smart meter and affecting me as I slept. It was at a local meeting about 5G in 2019 that I realised that it might not be the ageing process as I had assumed, but rather, the smart meter on my verandah, that might be causing these rather rapid declining changes to my health. I learnt at the meeting that there were ways to counter wireless radiation adverse effects in your home space. I wanted to make my home an emr safe place. I contacted the local geobiologist who had addressed the meeting, and he came to read the emr and geobiology in two sleeping spaces in my home. He found that indeed the radiation emissions from the smart meter were strong and likely affecting me, and he also made suggestions re protecting me from the effects of the electrical currents flowing through me as I slept which were from the wiring in my bedroom area. When the assessor came back with a spare piece of shielding mesh as a temporary measure, and placed it at the rear of the smart meter a week or two later, – I felt a greater ease in sleeping again and felt so grateful for the help. Realising that wireless radiation was likely the main culprit in what was happening to my health, I began to research emr on the internet and learnt that in NSW in Australia where I lived, some rulings had just come about that meant that NSW, QLD, SA, Tas and ACT electricity customers were allowed to have communications on ALREADY INSTALLED smart meters, turned off.. This was a ruling by the Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) that allowed metering coordinators to deactivate the communications on already-installed smart meters. The final rule allows metering coordinators, at their discretion, to deactivate the remote communications in response to customer objection. This was the information I needed to begin the process of negotiation with the electricity provider to change my meter from a 'communicating' to a 'non-communicating' meter. The whole process took a good 5 months however finally the provider removed the offending modem. Some years on, (2026), my sleep has improved a lot from where it was. My body feels great really. One unintended and unforeseen consequence of the changes I instigated back then, is a relative absence of the little stiffnesses that had begun to creep in since the installation of the smart meter. (I see from my research that the effects of wireless radiation on the body are cumulative.) On waking I noticed that my body felt good, whereas previously, since smart meter installation, it had begun to be a little stiff upon getting out of bed. I attribute this to several things - my bed was shifted so as to be away from the pathogenic earth stressors, which had been picked up by the assessor, and it was also shifted away from the wall so as to be away from the electricity fields in the wall. Additionally I currently turn the power off at night at the main switchboard, which would I imagine be eliminating electrical fields as I sleep completely. The main thing is that there has been no pulsing emr radiation impacting my body as I sleep. (I understand from my research, that emr does have impacts on our musculature as well as many other biological and neurological adverse biological impacts). However another factor in both my body's well-being, plus my brain's improved functioning would/could be coming from the supplements I have been taking to remediate my body from the adverse accumulative biological effects of exposure to the manmade emr. Mg citrate and Mg glycinate that are two of the four forms suggested by Mercola in his book "EMF'D". Mg Stearate is another form that I will take which is also suggested by him. I think the other supplement that is immensely helpful in dealing with the damaging health effects of wireless radiation transmissions in my body and brain, is the fermented pawpaw which was used by Belpomme and Irigaray with their trial subjects as in their paper "Electrohypersensitivity as a Newly Identified and Characterised Pathological Disorder: How to Diagnose, Treat and Prevent It" . They also used Gingko Biloba which I am only now just starting.. Their article is well worth reading. From their research they found that those who experience electrohypersensitivity, like myself, never come back to zero, and need to continue to minimise their exposure to wireless radiation as a preventative throughout their life. In 2023, a short film, (approx. 10 mins) on electrohypersensitivity, titled "Remembering Nearfield", won at the Cannes Film Festival in the Health Section. I feel prevention is the best route. When out in unknown wifi territory I mostly carry my emf radiation detector, so I can assess the least emr active zone to be in, and to minimise my time and presence in high emr zones. Having the emf detector is also handy if others are coming into my home with their devices. It enables me to check that there are no radiation fields being emitted unnecessarily in my home safe zone. (2025 update – I also carry my Blushield 01 scalar device when out and about and away from home.) The actual physical process of changing to a non-communicating meter simply involved a technician coming and removing the modem (for communicating), from the meter box, in my case. They left the aerial there, however it is not active without the modem. Having the emf radiation detector I find helpful for peace of mind to know that, for example, the modem HAD been removed and to confirm that indeed it was not transmitting . When taking readings from a smart meter with a wifi detector, it is important to know that you need to be reading the detector ongoing for at least 5 minutes, since the peak pulse of the smart meter occurs around every 5 minutes, 24/7, that is every 5 minutes. There are multitudinous lesser pulses actually many times a minute. I understand that there are almost 10,000 radiation pulses coming out of smart meters 24/7. (If you set the radiation measuring meter to also make sound you will then HEAR should there be a strong transmission, when, and if, your gaze is averted from the measuring meter.) (See "Biological and Health Effects of Radio Frequency Transmission: A Review of the Research Literature" ; A Report to the Staff and Directors of the Eugene Water and Electricity Board: June 2013, they served a court order to PG&E to provide clear documentation of what the smartmeters were actually doing.) I currently don't have a mobile phone at all which works for me. I experience unpleasant sensations in my arm when holding such devices. I have a landline, NBN, and wired ethernet cables for internet. The modem provided me by my server did not have a button to turn off the wifi, so I had to request for them, the server, to disable or turn off the wifi at their end. This means there is no wifi in my home. I have no other wified things, and that meant deliberately shopping for a no wifi tv, for example. For me, my home feels energetically safe and quiet again. I feel some balance is returning, however I still feel myself at some threat from escalation of 3G, 4G, 5G and the proliferation of wifi and emr in public buildings, schools of learning, and other public spaces. I used to enjoy visiting my library to read, however now because of so much wifi in the library, I avoid it. Becuase of the remediation measures that I have undertaken in my home, I have a safe , natural emr free space to return to and to recuperate. Travelling is somewhat limited for me as I need to have that emr free space in which to sleep and recuperate. I am still able to undertake short plane flights occasionally and wear an emr shielding singlet for the plane trip (I have to take it off while going through the metal detector though, as it is threaded with silver and copper). I need to wrap an emr shielding scarf around my whole head, face and shoulders when the wifi is turned on in the plane carriage. With my detector I can measure the radiation level outside the scarf and inside the scarf. The scarf wrapping noticeably decreases the level of radiation impacting my head and upper torso region. Without the shielding I experience unpleasant head pressure in a wified plane carriage. Because there is still a relative ignorance of the health hazards of wireless radiation, so far people/individuals affected by it, like me, have to find their own solutions for themselves. I feel a deep concern for my grandchildren and the next generations, and the impact on nature and the bird, animal and insect life with whom we share and enjoy this planet. Two of my grandchildren used to attend Primary Schools where there was an emr impact from either existing or proposed towers and one was in a school with a wifi system that could not be turned off because the switch was installed on the roof. This is of extreme concern to me. The other resource from the 5G meeting was connection with a group of people who were feeling similar concerns regarding the impact of emr for our own and society's future. There is some solace and comfort in knowing that, and in being able to join with others, and too, in learning and knowing of the existence of paths forward being taken by other groups and individuals. I appreciate and find hope, in that some countries, regions and cities are looking at, examining and accepting, the debilitating health experiences of many people who have been exposed to toxic emr environments and they are also examining available independent scientific research proving biological effects from emr, and they are saying 'no', or else, caution is needed here, to the escalation of emr in areas under their jurisdiction.. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute. 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. Your sincerely, Marian (Porter) Australia

Testimony to FCC ET Docket No. 13-84 submitted 10/19/26 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: https://bioinitiative.org/research-summaries/ 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: For years now I have been hunkering down in my home, and trying to mitigate EMF effects with varying degrees of effectiveness, in order to avoid massive exposure to everyone’s cell phones and the smart meters that have been forced on all of us, despite fighting for years to avoid this for numerous reasons, mostly health reasons. I get nasty frontal lobe headaches usually about 6-8 hours after being subjected to hundreds of phones in ANY event I try to attend. I have not yet figured out how to treat these horrible headaches when they happen, usually in the dead of night! All of my electronics are WIRED directly into the wall, as well as one whole room covered with aluminum screen door screening between myself and the next door neighbors who have Wi-Fi on the other side of the wall.Thank god we have not seen too many of the 5G poles going up around town and in our neighborhoods!!! One of my banks has a wall of shrubbery along the parking lot with numerous SMART Meters behind it. The shrubbery is deformed and burnt looking where it is close to that wall! If I lived close to a Cell Tower, I would probably move away! 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 have experienced mild to moderate to strong sensitivity to emf's ,increasingly being emitted from household and commercial WiFi and cell towers. I have been evaluated by health care practitioners for a combination of symptoms: low calcium levels, skin rashes, heart palpitations and irregularities and brain fog and mild generalized anxiety. I ask you to do independent research on the impacts of this technology on the whole ecosystem, as well as human health. I am deeply distressed that this technology has been rolled out without safety research. I remember watching Senator Blumenthal's hearing and panel of the ceo's of 5 big tech corporation and their admission that no safety research had been done.

EMF (electro magnetic fields): The EMFs in my vehicle give me heart palpitations and make my heart race and I can sense the EMFs given off by newer vehicles as well. The near field bluetooth communication used for medical devices causes abnormal heart rhythms and bowl obstructions and, yes, I have data that backs this statement up. The radiation given off by the cellular towers is getting worse because we need more and more towers for all the sensors required to run new tech. There is a lot of evidence-based research that proves exposure to EMFs causes heart and neurological issues. Please put safety checks in place to minimize the harm to humans. Thank you.

Scientific references regarding the possible causality or impact of RF EMFs on central sensitisation disorders: -International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environ Health. 2022 Oct 18;21(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9. PMID: 36253855; PMCID: PMC9576312. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36253855/ -Grigoriev О.А., Ushakov I.B., Alekseeva V.A. Electromagnetic Field Bio-Medical Effects Researches in Russia over 130 Years: The Main Stages of the Scientific Knowledge Grows // Radiation biology. Radioecology. - 2024. - Vol. 64. - N. 3. - P. 227-243. doi: 10.31857/S0869803124030014 https://journals.rcsi.science/0869-8031/article/view/272215 -Oguzhan Karapinar B., Altuntas E., Gul T., Tokpinar A., Degermenci M, Bas O. Adverse Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on the Central Nervous System: A Review. Odu Med J. 158.December 2025;12(3):158-169. DOI: 10.56941/odutip.1810345 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/399258297_Adverse_Effects_of_Electromagnetic_Fields_on_The_Central_Nervous_System_A_Review Oguzhan et al 2025 Bioinitiative Report 2012. https://bioinitiative.org/ -Schuermann D, Mevissen M. Manmade Electromagnetic Fields and Oxidative Stress-Biological Effects and Consequences for Health. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Apr 6;22(7):3772. doi: 10.3390/ijms22073772. PMID: 33917298; PMCID: PMC8038719. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33917298/ - Yunus MB. Central sensitivity syndromes: a new paradigm and group nosology for fibromyalgia and overlapping conditions, and the related issue of disease versus illness. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Jun;37(6):339-52. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2007.09.003. Epub 2008 Jan 14. PMID: 18191990. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18191990/ - Carruthers, B.M., van de Sande, M.I., De Meirleir, K.L., Klimas, N.G., Broderick, G., Mitchell, T., Staines, D., Powles, A.C.P., Speight, N., Vallings, R., Bateman, L., Baumgarten-Austrheim, B., Bell, D.S., Carlo-Stella, N., Chia, J., Darragh, A., Jo, D., Lewis, D., Light, A.R., Marshall-Gradisbik, S., Mena, I., Mikovits, J.A., Miwa, K., Murovska, M., Pall, M.L. and Stevens, S. (2011), Myalgic encephalomyelitis: International Consensus Criteria. Journal of Internal Medicine, 270: 327-338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x - Piras C, Conte S, Pibiri M, Rao G, Muntoni S, Leoni VP, Finco G, Atzori L. Metabolomics and psychological features in fibromyalgia and electromagnetic sensitivity. Sci Rep. 2020 Nov 24;10(1):20418. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-76876-8. PMID: 33235303; PMCID: PMC7686375. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33235303/ - De Luca C, Raskovic D, Pacifico V, Thai JC, Korkina L. The search for reliable biomarkers of disease in multiple chemical sensitivity and other environmental intolerances. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011 Jul;8(7):2770-97. doi: 10.3390/ijerph8072770. Epub 2011 Jul 1. PMID: 21845158; PMCID: PMC3155329. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21845158/ - Cordero MD, de Miguel M, Carmona-López I, Bonal P, Campa F, Moreno-Fernández AM. Oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction in fibromyalgia. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2010;31(2):169-73. PMID: 20424583. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20424583/ - Cordero MD, de Miguel M, Moreno-Fernández AM. La disfunción mitocondrial en la fibromialgia y su implicación en la patogénesis de la enfermedad [Mitochondrial dysfunction in fibromyalgia and its implication in the pathogenesis of disease]. Med Clin (Barc). 2011 Mar 12;136(6):252-6. Spanish. doi: 10.1016/j.medcli.2010.01.030. Epub 2010 Apr 24. PMID: 20417529. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20417529/ - De Luca C, Thai JC, Raskovic D, Cesareo E, Caccamo D, Trukhanov A, Korkina L. Metabolic and genetic screening of electromagnetic hypersensitive subjects as a feasible tool for diagnostics and intervention. Mediators Inflamm. 2014;2014:924184. doi: 10.1155/2014/924184. Epub 2014 Apr 9. PMID: 24812443; PMCID: PMC4000647. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24812443/ - Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K, Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016 Sep 1;31(3):363-97. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011. PMID: 27454111. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27454111/ - Stein Y, Udasin IG. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS, microwave syndrome) - Review of mechanisms. Environ Res. 2020 Jul;186:109445. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109445. Epub 2020 Mar 30. PMID: 32289567. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32289567/ - Belpomme D, Carlo GL, Irigaray P, Carpenter DO, Hardell L, Kundi M, Belyaev I, Havas M, Adlkofer F, Heuser G, Miller AB, Caccamo D, De Luca C, von Klitzing L, Pall ML, Bandara P, Stein Y, Sage C, Soffritti M, Davis D, Moskowitz JM, Mortazavi SMJ, Herbert MR, Moshammer H, Ledoigt G, Turner R, Tweedale A, Muñoz-Calero P, Udasin I, Koppel T, Burgio E, Vorst AV. The Critical Importance of Molecular Biomarkers and Imaging in the Study of Electrohypersensitivity. A Scientific Consensus International Report. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Jul 7;22(14):7321. doi: 10.3390/ijms22147321. PMID: 34298941; PMCID: PMC8304862. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34298941/ - Zothansiama, Zosangzuali M, Lalramdinpuii M, Jagetia GC. Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations. Electromagn Biol Med. 2017;36(3):295-305. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2017.1350584. Epub 2017 Aug 4. PMID: 28777669. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28777669/ - Sonzogni L, Al-Choboq J, Combemale P, Massardier-Pilonchéry A, Bouchet A, May P, Doré JF, Debouzy JC, Bourguignon M, Dréan YL, Foray N. Skin Fibroblasts from Individuals Self-Diagnosed as Electrosensitive Reveal Two Distinct Subsets with Delayed Nucleoshuttling of the ATM Protein in Common. Int J Mol Sci. 2025 May 16;26(10):4792. doi: 10.3390/ijms26104792. PMID: 40429933; PMCID: PMC12112057. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40429933/ - Leszczynski D. Review of the scientific evidence on the individual sensitivity to electromagnetic fields (EHS). Rev Environ Health. 2021 Jul 6;37(3):423-450. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0038. PMID: 34229366. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34229366/ - Leszczynski D. Wireless radiation and health: making the case for proteomics research of individual sensitivity. Front Public Health. 2025 Jan 10;12:1543818. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1543818. PMID: 39866356; PMCID: PMC11758280. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39866356/ - Pall ML. Common etiology of posttraumatic stress disorder, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and multiple chemical sensitivity via elevated nitric oxide/peroxynitrite. Med Hypotheses. 2001 Aug;57(2):139-45. doi: 10.1054/mehy.2001.1325. PMID: 11461161. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11461161/ Pall ML. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med. 2013 Aug;17(8):958-65. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088. Epub 2013 Jun 26. PMID: 23802593; PMCID: PMC3780531. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23802593/ - Panagopoulos DJ, Karabarbounis A, Yakymenko I, Chrousos GP. Human-made electromagnetic fields: Ion forced-oscillation and voltage-gated ion channel dysfunction, oxidative stress and DNA damage (Review). Int J Oncol. 2021 Nov;59(5):92. doi: 10.3892/ijo.2021.5272. Epub 2021 Oct 7. PMID: 34617575; PMCID: PMC8562392. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34617575/ - Panagopoulos DJ, Yakymenko I, De Iuliis GN, Chrousos GP. A comprehensive mechanism of biological and health effects of anthropogenic extremely low frequency and wireless communication electromagnetic fields. Front Public Health. 2025 Jun 4;13:1585441. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1585441. PMID: 40547468; PMCID: PMC12179773. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40547468/ - Panagopoulos DJ, Litovsky R, Chamberlin K. Recording the extremely low frequency pulsations of wireless communication electromagnetic fields. Electromagn Biol Med. 2026 Apr 19:1-10. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2026.2654072. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 42002914. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42002914/ - Gurhan H, Barnes F. Frequency-Dependent Antioxidant Responses in HT-1080 Human Fibrosarcoma Cells Exposed to Weak Radio Frequency Fields. Antioxidants (Basel). 2024 Oct 15;13(10):1237. doi: 10.3390/antiox13101237. PMID: 39456490; PMCID: PMC11504554. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39456490/ - International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 2020 May;118(5):483-524. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001210. PMID: 32167495. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32167495/ - Rems L, Kasimova MA, Testa I, Delemotte L. Pulsed Electric Fields Can Create Pores in the Voltage Sensors of Voltage-Gated Ion Channels. Biophys J. 2020 Jul 7;119(1):190-205. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2020.05.030. Epub 2020 Jun 8. PMID: 32559411; PMCID: PMC7335976. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32559411/ - Bertagna F, Lewis R, Silva SRP, McFadden J, Jeevaratnam K. Effects of electromagnetic fields on neuronal ion channels: a systematic review. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2021 Sep;1499(1):82-103. doi: 10.1111/nyas.14597. Epub 2021 May 4. PMID: 33945157. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33945157/ - Hu C, Zuo H, Li Y. Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation on Neurotransmitters in the Brain. Front Public Health. 2021 Aug 17;9:691880. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.691880. PMID: 34485223; PMCID: PMC8415840. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34485223/ - Foerster BR, Petrou M, Edden RA, Sundgren PC, Schmidt-Wilcke T, Lowe SE, Harte SE, Clauw DJ, Harris RE. Reduced insular γ-aminobutyric acid in fibromyalgia. Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Feb;64(2):579-83. doi: 10.1002/art.33339. PMID: 21913179; PMCID: PMC3374930. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21913179/ - Pyke TL, Osmotherly PG, Baines S. Measuring Glutamate Levels in the Brains of Fibromyalgia Patients and a Potential Role for Glutamate in the Pathophysiology of Fibromyalgia Symptoms: A Systematic Review. Clin J Pain. 2017 Oct;33(10):944-954. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000474. PMID: 28033157. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28033157/ Harding EK, Zamponi GW. Central and peripheral contributions of T-type calcium channels in pain. Mol Brain. 2022 May 2;15(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s13041-022-00923-w. PMID: 35501819; PMCID: PMC9063214. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35501819/ - Torkan A, Zoghi M, Foroughimehr N, Yavari A, Jaberzadeh S. Effects of Mobile Electromagnetic Exposure on Brain Oscillations and Cortical Excitability: Scoping Review. Sensors (Basel). 2025 Apr 26;25(9):2749. doi: 10.3390/s25092749. PMID: 40363190; PMCID: PMC12074369. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40363190/ - Lyskov E, Sandström M, Hansson Mild K. Neurophysiological study of patients with perceived 'electrical hypersensitivity'. Int J Psychophysiol. 2001 Nov;42(3):233-41. doi: 10.1016/s0167-8760(01)00141-6. PMID: 11812390. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11812390/ - Murga Gandasegui I, Aranburu Laka L, Gargiulo PÁ, Gómez-Esteban JC, Lafuente Sánchez JV. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Neurological Entity? Medicina (Kaunas). 2021 Sep 27;57(10):1030. doi: 10.3390/medicina57101030. PMID: 34684066; PMCID: PMC8540700. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34684066/ -- Carruthers, B.M., van de Sande, M.I., De Meirleir, K.L., Klimas, N.G., Broderick, G., Mitchell, T., Staines, D., Powles, A.C.P., Speight, N., Vallings, R., Bateman, L., Baumgarten-Austrheim, B., Bell, D.S., Carlo-Stella, N., Chia, J., Darragh, A., Jo, D., Lewis, D., Light, A.R., Marshall-Gradisbik, S., Mena, I., Mikovits, J.A., Miwa, K., Murovska, M., Pall, M.L. and Stevens, S. (2011), Myalgic encephalomyelitis: International Consensus Criteria. Journal of Internal Medicine, 270: 327-338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x - Martínez-Lavín M. Management of dysautonomia in fibromyalgia. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2002 May;28(2):379-87. doi: 10.1016/s0889-857x(01)00015-1. PMID: 12122925. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12122925/ -Eisinger J. Dysautonomia, fibromyalgia and reflex dystrophy. Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9(4):105. doi: 10.1186/ar2212. PMID: 17626612; PMCID: PMC2206362. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17626612/ -Bijlsma N, Conduit R, Kennedy G, Cohen M. Does radiofrequency radiation impact sleep? A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot study. Front Public Health. 2024 Oct 29;12:1481537. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1481537. PMID: 39534742; PMCID: PMC11554657. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39534742/ -Sousouri G, Eicher C, D'Angelo RM, Billecocq M, Fussinger T, Studler M, Capstick M, Kuster N, Achermann P, Huber R, Landolt HP. 5G radio-frequency-electromagnetic-field effects on the human sleep electroencephalogram: A randomized controlled study in CACNA1C genotyped volunteers. Neuroimage. 2025 Aug 15;317:121340. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121340. Epub 2025 Jun 18. PMID: 40541756. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40541756/ -Carter B, Rees P, Hale L, Bhattacharjee D, Paradkar MS. Association Between Portable Screen-Based Media Device Access or Use and Sleep Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2016;170(12):1202–1208. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.2341 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2571467 -Schmid MR, Loughran SP, Regel SJ, Murbach M, Bratic Grunauer A, Rusterholz T, Bersagliere A, Kuster N, Scientific evidence support for the relationship between central sensitivity illnesses and the effects on health of radiofrequencies under the currently regulated limits Achermann P. Sleep EEG alterations: effects of different pulse-modulated radio frequency electromagnetic fields. J Sleep Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):50-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2011.00918.x. Epub 2011 Apr 12. PMID: 21489004. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21489004/ -Kim J, Hwang Y, Kim S, Kwon D, Park J, Cho B, An S, Kang S, Kim Y, Kim S, Lengner CJ, Kim S, Kwon Y, Sung JS, Kim J. Electromagnetic field-inducible in vivo gene switch for remote spatiotemporal control of gene expression. Cell. 2026 May 28;189(11):3465-3480.e23. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2026.03.029. Epub 2026 Apr 14. Erratum in: Cell. 2026 Jul 9;189(14):4517-4518. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2026.06.020. PMID: 41985457. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41985457/ -Levin M. Bioelectric signaling: Reprogrammable circuits underlying embryogenesis, regeneration, and cancer. Cell. 2021 Apr 15;184(8):1971-1989. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.02.034. Epub 2021 Apr 6. PMID: 33826908. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33826908/ -Dasdag S, Akdag MZ, Bashan M, Kizmaz V, Erdal N, Emin Erdal M, Tughan Kiziltug M, Yegin K. Role of 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi on some miRNA and faty acids composition in brain. Electromagn Biol Med. 2022 Jul 3;41(3):281-292. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2022.2065682. Epub 2022 Apr 17. Erratum in: Electromagn Biol Med. 2022 Oct 2;41(4):i-iii. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2022.2088659. PMID: 35435088. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35435088/ -Kostoff RN, Heroux P, Aschner M, Tsatsakis A. Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions. Toxicol Lett. 2020 May 1;323:35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.01.020. Epub 2020 Jan 25. PMID: 31991167. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31991167/ -Sueiro-Benavides RA, Leiro-Vidal JM, Salas-Sánchez AÁ, Rodríguez-González JA, Ares-Pena FJ, López-Martín ME. Radiofrequency at 2.45 GHz increases toxicity, pro-inflammatory and pre-apoptotic activity caused by black carbon in the RAW 264.7 macrophage cell line. Sci Total Environ. 2021 Apr 15;765:142681. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142681. Epub 2020 Oct 4. PMID: 33071139. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33071139/ -Precursors Need to be Considered to Promote Recovery from Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance–Attributed to Electromagnetic Fields. Medical Research Archives , [S.l.], v. 13, n. 1, jan. 2025.ISSN 2375-1924.Available at: < https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/6253 >. Date accessed: 16 oct. 2026.doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v13i1.6253 . https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/6253 -Nittby H, Brun A, Eberhardt J, Malmgren L, Persson BR, Salford LG. Increased blood-brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone. Pathophysiology. 2009 Aug;16(2-3):103-12. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.001. Epub 2009 Apr 2. PMID: 19345073. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19345073/ -Tang J, Zhang Y, Yang L, Chen Q, Tan L, Zuo S, Feng H, Chen Z, Zhu G. Exposure to 900 MHz electromagnetic fields activates the mkp-1/ERK pathway and causes blood-brain barrier damage and cognitive impairment in rats. Brain Res. 2015 Mar 19;1601:92-101. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.01.019. Epub 2015 Jan 15. PMID: 25598203. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25598203/ -Nelson I. When biology meets polarity: Toward a unified framework for sex-dependent responses to magnetic polarity in living systems. Electromagn Biol Med. 2026;45(3):280-294. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2026.2621660. Epub 2026 Jan 31. PMID: 41618935. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41618935/ -Wallace KB, Starkov AA. Mitochondrial targets of drug toxicity. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2000;40:353-88. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.40.1.353. PMID: 10836141. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10836141/

For the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Re-evaluation of Radiofrequency limits and policies. I am participating as a member of the public affected by health damage caused by wireless technologies (specifically, by a mobile phone tower) but I will incorporate references from peer-reviewed scientific studies to support what I am going to relate. My story: I experienced ten years of progressive decline in my physical and cognitive health with multiple symptoms that doctors couldn't explain (severe sleep disorder confirmed by polysomnography, contractures and intense muscle and joint pain, exercise intolerance confirmed by stress tests, dysautonomia confirmed by tilt table testing , attention, memory, and concentration deficits confirmed by tests, vitamin D deficiency, and hyperparathyroidism). After those ten years without a diagnosis, I received, in this order and over the course of eight years, the following successive diagnoses: fibromyalgia (FM), myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS)—doctors told me these were chronic and incurable diseases—a cellular problem (a 40% deficiency of coenzyme Q10 confirmed by skin biopsy and fibroblast analysis, indicating mitochondrial dysfunction), multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), and finally, electrohypersensitivity. (EHS). I underwent genetic testing, and no mutations were found in the genes responsible for producing coenzyme Q10 or in my mitochondria. I was a primary school teacher and a secondary school teacher, but physical and cognitive problems prevented me from continuing to work. I was granted disability benefits, and my life was completely disrupted for many years. I received the diagnosis of electrohypersensitivity after undergoing microwave and low-frequency current therapy for a knee sprain. This treatment, which didn't occur immediately but took several days, caused severe muscle worsening (cramps and involuntary movements of the treated muscles every few seconds ) and a decline in my overall health (sleep problems, pain, exercise intolerance, etc.). I was diagnosed with EHS not so much because I had developed new symptoms, but because the cause of the symptoms I had been suffering from for many years had been discovered. This medical diagnosis is supported, in my case, by medical certificates from an endocrinologist, a neurologist, and an internist. I was advised to have my house measured. It was then that I discovered something I was completely unaware of and would never have connected to my symptoms: I had lived for 25 years facing a cell phone tower, located about 250 meters away, whose antenna pointed directly at my house without any obstruction. When I checked the data on the official Spanish government website regarding that antenna, I discovered that it was emitting between 200 and 2,000 times more than any other antenna or in any other direction. The reason was that there were no antennas beyond my house, and the coverage of a large part of the city was covered by the emissions from that antenna directed toward my house. In 2016, they installed more cell phone antennas, and the emission levels toward my home decreased, but the damage had already been done; the sensitization of my central nervous system and the cellular damage had already occurred. Some symptoms, such as insomnia and muscle tension, began as soon as I moved into that house, but the decline in my health was slow, progressive, and insidious. It reached its peak many years after I moved in and only subsided after I was treated with high doses of coenzyme Q10 and after actively avoiding electromagnetic pollution. My symptoms are not caused by immediate exposure to EMFs, but rather by chronic and cumulative exposure. I experienced a worsening of my condition during and after the COVID -19 lockdown, as a new 5G frequency had been introduced to the antenna beforehand. In 2020, I decided to leave my house and move to a rural area where the nearest cell tower is 2 km away and I have no electromagnetic pollution. Over the last few years, I have experienced such improvement that I have fully recovered my physical and cognitive abilities. The symptoms of all the central sensitization diseases that I had been diagnosed with as chronic and incurable have disappeared, and I have also been able to significantly reduce my coenzyme Q10 dosage since moving. Scientific evidence related to my case: My experience, supported by scientific studies, leads me to believe that not only electromagnetic hypersensitivity, but all central sensitization disorders (fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, and EHS) may be caused by, or at least closely related to, electromagnetic pollution. These disorders are generating enormous medical, occupational, social, and economic costs, are cutting short many lives, and affect millions of people worldwide. Scientific studies provide ample evidence to support my argument. The effects of wireless technologies have only been regulated for acute exposures and thermal effects, not for chronic exposures or biological effects. Current limits ignore years of accumulated scientific evidence demonstrating health risks even at currently regulated levels. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36253855/ ICBE-EMF 2022. 130 years of scientific studies on the biological effects of EMF and RF, from chronic exposures, carried out in Russia, show that, beyond thermal damage, the main biological damage occurs in the central nervous system and in cells. https://www.emf-portal.org/en/article/57904 Grigoriev et al 2024 . https://www.researchgate.net/publication/399258297_Adverse_Effects_of_Electromagnetic_Fields_on_The_Central_Nervous_System_A_Review Oguzhan et al 2025 Cellular oxidative stress, neurological damage, and DNA damage are the effects of RF and the low-frequency EMFs that modulate them that have the greatest scientific consensus, according to the Bioinitiative Report . https://bioinitiative.org/ RF EMFs generate oxidative stress capable of altering cellular function and metabolism: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33917298/ Mevissen et al 2021 Damage to the central nervous system, metabolic and cellular problems, alterations in antioxidant levels, and cellular oxidative stress have been described and could explain the symptoms of the so-called central sensitization diseases (we will use this term for practical reasons to refer to FM, CFS, MCS, and EHS, although the damage seems to occur far beyond the central nervous system). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18191990/ Yunus 2008 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x Carruthers et al 2011 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33235303/ Piras et al 2020 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21845158/ De Luca et al 2011 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20424583/ Codero et al 2010 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20417529/ Cordero et al 2011 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24812443/ De Luca et al 2014 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27454111/ Velyaev et al 2016 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32289567/ Stein et al 2020 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34298941/ Belpomme et al 2021 DNA damage and altered antioxidants have been found in people living near mobile phone base stations. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28777669/ Zothansiama et al 2017 French researchers have established a molecular definition of electrohypersensitivity (EHS) by analyzing fibroblasts from affected individuals. They concluded that these cells have difficulty managing their own oxidative stress and exhibit spontaneous DNA breaks and genomic instability. They found that this would make EHS individuals more sensitive than the general population to the oxidative stress generated by ionizing radiation. (It seems logical that this could also make them more sensitive to cellular oxidative stress caused by chronic exposure to non-ionizing radiation.) They characterized two subgroups within EHS individuals: one with a tendency toward premature aging and another with a tendency toward cancer. Further research in this area would be very interesting, including exposing fibroblasts from individuals with EHS and other central sensitization diseases to non-ionizing radiation. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40429933/ Sonzogni et al 2025 It is important that the cells of the affected individuals, not the individuals themselves, are exposed to modulated RF radiation. Exposure levels are already regulated to prevent immediate effects, let alone perceived or subjective effects. The most significant damage results from chronic exposure. People should not be chronically exposed to what harms them. If the exposure is occasional, insufficient, or short, it is not enough to demonstrate causality (except in allergy tests, but EHS is not an allergy). This invalidates provocation studies methodologically. Neither ionizing nor non-ionizing radiation is perceptible to the senses, nor should its immediate health effects be subjectively perceived, as the damage occurs at the cellular, metabolic, or neurological level. The studies chosen to verify the health damage of RF should be genetic, epigenetic, metabolic, or proteomic, but on cells, not directly exposing people, as would be done for any other toxicological damage or for any other disease. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34229366/ Leszczynski 2021 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39866356/ Leszczynski 2025 But we will not limit ourselves to EHS: the symptoms and etiology of all central sensitization diseases can be explained, to a large extent, through the effects of low-frequency EMFs and RF on biology and health: Martin Pall's research has described how central sensitization diseases are caused by the NO/ONOO cycle of cellular oxidative stress, which leads to an excess of nitric oxide and peroxynitrite . Subsequent research by the same scientist identifies electromagnetic fields (EMFs) as the cause of this cycle because they cause the excessive opening of voltage-gated calcium channels in cells, generating cellular oxidative stress and an excess of nitric oxide and peroxynitrite (the NO/ONOO cycle). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11461161/ Pall 2001 https://pubmed.nc b i.nlm.nih.gov/23802593/ Pall 2013 Along these same lines, Dimitris Pangopoulos had been publishing since 2000 that polarized electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce cellular ionic oscillations that generate excessive opening of voltage-gated calcium channels, causing cellular oxidative stress that affects the cell membrane, ion exchange, and the electron transport chain. According to this researcher, all high-frequency wireless radiation (RF) is modulated by low-frequency EMFs, which are what produce the biological and cellular effects. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34617575/ Panagopoulos et al 2021 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40547468/ Panagopoulos et al 2025 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42002914/ Panagopoulos et al 2026 EMFs have the capacity to alter mitochondrial function, producing significant changes in certain antioxidant enzymes—which, as we have seen, are also being found to be altered in several of the reviewed studies in people with central sensitization diseases. Oxidative stress is involved in both cancer and aging. EMFs can have therapeutic effects, but they can also have harmful effects if doses and long-term exposure time are not controlled. This calls into question the limits for wireless technologies set by ICNIRP in 2020 or those maintained by the FCC, which only consider acute and isolated exposures, but not chronic exposures. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39456490/ Gurham et al 2024 In this regard, the ICNIRP itself acknowledges, in its 2020 review of limits, that one of the mechanisms by which RF can harm health is through changes in the permeability of cell membranes : “If the pulse is intense and brief, exposure to the resulting electromagnetic fields can cause cell membranes to become permeable, which could lead to other cellular changes. However, there is no evidence that the radiofrequency element of an electromagnetic field (without the low-frequency component) can cause sufficient changes in the permeability of cell membranes.” The parenthetical statement inserted by ICNIRP is misleading. Panagopoulos explains that all radio frequencies are modulated with low frequencies. ICNIRP tends to include laboratory studies in its reviews where the radiofrequency is pure and not modulated with other radio frequencies, but in real-world applications, all radio frequencies (mobile phones, antennas, Wi-Fi, etc.) are modulated with low frequencies. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32167495/ ICNIRP 2020 Pulsed electric fields are being used in medicine with controlled doses and durations to permeabilize the cell membrane through electroporation, but this can affect voltage sensors, disrupting the entire functioning of the cell membrane. This could lead to pathological effects if exposures are chronic. https://pubme d .ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32559411/ Rems et al 2020 A systematic review compiles the damage to cells and neurons caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs). It has been repeatedly demonstrated experimentally that exposing neurons to EMFs in a laboratory, under controlled conditions, causes damage. The central nervous system is particularly sensitive to this damage. The harm is more severe when exposures are chronic. https://pubmed.n c bi.nlm.nih.gov/33945157/ Bertagna et al 2021 A systematic review of animal studies reveals the ability of radiofrequency (RF) to alter neurotransmitter metabolism and function, resulting in a disruption of the excitatory-inhibitory balance of neurons and the central nervous system. This leads to, among other consequences, cognitive problems and decreased learning and memory capacity. This imbalance between inhibitory and excitatory neurotransmitters is also being observed in central sensitization disorders. https://pubmed.nc b i.nlm.nih.gov/34485223/ Hu et al 2021 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21913179/ Foerster et al 2012 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28033157/ Pyke et al 2017 Voltage-gated calcium channels, which we have seen are particularly affected by RF EMFs, are also related to pain, so prevalent in central sensitization diseases. https://pubmed.n c bi.nlm.nih.gov/35501819/ Harding et al 2022 RF EMFs are capable of altering the electroencephalogram of animals and humans, revealing changes in brain function and waves (particularly affecting alpha waves, which are associated with relaxation, concentration, memory, and sleep). This, combined with the inhibitory-excitatory imbalance of neurons caused by EMFs , as previously mentioned, could explain the dysautonomia present in central sensitization disorders. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40363190/ Torkan et al 2025 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11812390/ Lyskov et al 2001 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x Carruthers et al 2011 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34684066/ Murga Gandasegui et al 2021 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12122925/ Martínez Lavín et al 2002 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17626612/ Eisinger 2007 RF EMFs are also likely to disrupt sleep. Specifically, interindividual differences have been found that may be influenced by genetic factors. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39534742/ Bijlsma et al 2024 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40541756/ Sousouri et al 2025 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2571467 Carter et al 2016 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21489004/ Schmid et al 2012 Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are being used experimentally to activate and deactivate genes, which can have therapeutic effects but is also likely to produce negative health effects, since cellular electrical mechanisms, membrane potentials, and ion channels appear to underlie this capacity for genetic activation and deactivation. Experiments have shown that certain RF frequencies can modify brain RNA. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41985457/ Kim et al 2026 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33826908/ Levin et al 2021 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35435088/ Dasdag et al 2022 RF EMFs are likely to amplify the effects of other environmental toxins that are already causing numerous health problems and may also be closely linked to the etiology of central sensitization disorders. We all have a multitude of chemical substances in our blood, and studies suggest that EMFs may be permeabilizing the blood-brain barrier, allowing these substances to reach the brain. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31991167/ Kostoff et al 2020 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33071139/ Sueiro-Benavides et al 2021 https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/6253 Havas et al 2025 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19345073/ Nittby et al 2009 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25598203/ Tang et al 2015 Eighty percent of those affected by central sensitization disorders are women. There are specific sex differences in the effects produced by electromagnetic pollution. The main factors involved in these differences include the Heart orientation and position, cardiac mass, tissue conductivity, hormonal modulation, autonomic balance, and cortical field organization. Beyond sex, consistent findings demonstrate that biological effects depend not only on field intensity and frequency, but also on polarity (north/south) and the direction (vector angle). These parameters are often overlooked or not reported in published work. Some observations even suggest a direct relationship between polarity and sex, with divergent physiological and behavioral outcomes. It is essential to conduct sex-differentiated research on the health effects of RF, specifically include women in research, and report research results separated by sex. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41618935/ Nelson 2026 Conclusion: It can still be argued that the current limits for wireless technologies are safe despite all the accumulated scientific evidence to the contrary. Central sensitization disorders can still be treated with antidepressants, which will worsen the underlying cellular and mitochondrial imbalances and damage—initially, after my diagnosis of fibromyalgia and ME/CFS, I was treated with low-dose antidepressants, and this caused a dramatic deterioration in my health that did not subside until they were discontinued, probably because they were worsening already severely impaired cellular function. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10836141/ Wallace et al 2000 If we continue to deny peer-reviewed scientific evidence, the accumulated damage and suffering will result in human, social, labor, and economic costs that may prove unbearable for our economies and societies. It is essential to begin applying the precautionary principle by honestly reviewing current limits in light of current scientific evidence and investing in research and medical training. In particular, it is necessary to investigate the so-called central sensitization diseases that have emerged and spread rapidly in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, affecting billions of people worldwide, predominantly women. Their potential link to electromagnetic pollution should be a priority area for research and prevention. Risk assessment needs to be different for populations such as children, pregnant women, older adults, people with implanted medical devices, workers with high occupational exposure, people with pre-existing medical conditions, and people affected by central sensitization diseases, for the reasons already stated. Blanca Salinas Álvarez Blanca.salinas.alvarez@gmail.com

I was living a total "normal life" with a partner and three children, working as a carer in many different homes. Since a young age I had occasionaly migraines and suffered from those, but in 2020 they became very reccurent and so sore to the point where I thought they was blood dripping inside my scalp around my brain. They got so bad that I ended having some ophtalmic migraines followed by hemiplegia migraines. I also have had a few tiny strokes !!! I used to sleep up to 2 hours tops at night no matter what I did. I then realised that my headaches were getting worse in some places I worked at, and not so bad in others. At home it wasn't getting any better. I by miracle (and I say miracle otherwise i'd probably be dead by now) understood that the wireless exposure were the things that made me have EMR Syndrome symptoms just by swtiching my wifi off one night. I started minimising my hours at work and obvisously the work placements therefore I wouldn't suffer as much. I then had to run away from home because even by doing all that, things weren't getting any better as they was a 5G antenna 400 meters away from my house... I had to leave everything, and lost everything just because I was living in a microwave that i never asked for and didn't want to end up burning up like a piece of alluminium in a micro wave. I now live in a safe place with hardly any neighbours, don't go out, don't see anyone unless they switch their wireless equipement off such as mobile phones, connected watch, Bluetooth items etc etc ! All of those things have to stay away from the house I where live now. I sleep in a Faraday cage, and use the strict miminum the electricity. I can't go to the kids school parties, go to weddings, go on holidays, see family etc, all I can do is stay isolated at home, it isn't fair at all as I never asked or even needed all this technology to destroy me and my life. This has to stop as I am sure many people are sufferring around the world and probably being called pshychos when in reality they are far from it.