Pregnancy & reproduction

Re Docket 25-276, “Build America: Eliminating Barriers to Wireless Deployments” I’m a mother and a pediatric functional nutrition practitioner. I’m asking the FCC to protect meaningful local oversight, public participation, and health considerations in decisions about wireless infrastructure. Parents deserve to know what is being installed near our homes, schools, and playgrounds. We deserve clear notice, accessible information, and a real opportunity to raise concerns before decisions are finalized. Our ability to participate needs to carry actual weight. I’m particularly concerned about how exposure guidelines account for children, pregnant women, and people with complex medical conditions. Please explain how the FCC evaluates long-term exposure, exposure from multiple sources, and the needs of medically vulnerable people. Families deserve transparent answers about the evidence, its limitations, and the questions that remain. I ask the FCC to require independent verification of compliance, make those results publicly accessible, and provide a clear process for investigating residents’ concerns. Communities also need authority to consider placement near homes, schools, and childcare centers. Once infrastructure is installed near a family’s home, that family has limited control over its exposure. Moving is financially impossible for many parents. That makes public participation and careful review essential. Please reject provisions that weaken meaningful community input or local oversight. Explain how public health concerns will be evaluated and addressed before expanding wireless deployment. Our children deserve a voice in these decisions, and their parents deserve to be heard.

I'm writing in regards to the FCCs lack of response to the D.C Court of Appeals remand concerning it's decades old - radio frequency (RF) radiofrequency exposure guidelines. The FCC has had more than enough time to review and address the evidence by the 9th Circuit Court win, on August 13, 2021. This has to be done! Enough lives have already been taken and ruined! This will effect the most vulnerable and already has. I've done extensive research and the ITU BDT (R-T-D) IPEC-WB-WRC-GSR- Plenipotentiary, via the Department of State has to be stopped! We have an industry and government that are both rogue. Not only is wireless harmful it DOES cause cancers! The new P25 warnings out of CA state on the new 5GHz phones "May cause reproductive harm." Since when do we test (never tested) cell phones for RF harm, using a plastic head! Now we are dealing with smart meters, smart grid, Broadband, Wi-fi, satellites, etc. 5GHz now going to over 8GHz via WRC27. Enough is enough and start doing what is right! It may be your own lives you are saving. TRUST ME...losing my son from a cell-tower/cell-phone RF has destroyed my life and I've witnessed many others being harmed. This has to be covered by disabilities. I know people that are so disabled from being exposed that they pray to make it to another day. All of this has to be reigned in. The WEF-WB are not in charge! Sincerely, Virginia Farver

I and others in my circle are very sensitive to EMFs and wireless radiation. We experience headaches, joint aches, cannot think/process clearly, dizziness - and I have read that some people have seizures when exposed to any amount of radiation. There are studies showing that cell phones emit more radiation than is allowed according to current FCC limits. This is multiplied in children, who have smaller bodies/brains (which are still developing). There are wi-fi towers EVERYWHERE, making it very difficult for those who suffer to participate for very long (or at all) in any public place, be it restaurants, libraries, public buildings, and even peoples' houses. Multiple studies show that we do NOT need 5G, as the current speed is sufficient for most needs, yet they keep making signals stronger and forcing us to use them. We are told that EVERYONE needs wi-fi in their homes, so in an apartment building you will have multiple full-strength signals on 24/7. Manufacturers make it difficult to turn routers on and off quickly. All of this radiation is impossible to get away from. EMF protective clothing is not enough. Most of us have ethernet in our homes because we are forced to have wi-fi/computers in order to do anything in life. Alternative measures such as ethernet or landlines are made so expensive that many cannot afford them. Manufacturers do not provide alternatives for sufferers like us. Many people have sued to get masts off of school buildings, as studies have shown higher rates of cancer in students attending those schools. Multiple studies show tumors or weakened bone structure directly under places where people place their phones next to their bodies. Multiple studies show lower sperm counts for men who insist on putting their phones in their pockets. It is outrageous that these studies are not being made public. We are not made aware of the dangers of keeping cell phones on and next to the body for ANY length of time. This is only stated in the VERY SMALL print in cell phone inserts, which are worded in legalese and so small that no one takes the time to read them. Manufacturers should be forced to fully disclose the dangers of cell phone and "smart" machine use to the public. "Smart" meters, TVs, appliances, etc. are another major source of cancer of which no one is aware. Utility companies also make it more expensive and more difficult to stop "smart meters" from being installed on one's property. We are literally killing ourselves by allowing this radiation in every part of our lives. If we want to have a healthy nation, we must fund scientists who can find ways to make communication healthier. Please take a long, hard look at ALL studies, who funded them, how they were set up, and who stands to gain by the outcomes. We need to get back to HONEST scientific reasoning and studies that are not driven by profit and market share. The FCC needs to work for the PUBLIC and IT'S SAFETY once again.

I urge the FCC to take a careful, science-based look at the potential health effects of long-term exposure to radiofrequency (RF) radiation and to reconsider whether the current exposure limits are adequately protective. The FCC's existing limits date back to 1996, while wireless exposure has increased dramatically with cell phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cell towers, and newer 5G technologies. Research has raised concerns about biological effects that are not adequately addressed by limits based primarily on thermal effects, including oxidative stress, DNA damage, reproductive effects, neurological effects, and effects on children. The scientific evidence deserves a thorough and independent review. Research has reported potential effects involving children's exposure, prenatal and developmental outcomes, oxidative stress, DNA damage, reproductive health, neurological function, long-term exposure, and wildlife. I ask the FCC to fully address this evidence, including potential effects from long-term and cumulative exposure and the particular vulnerability of children, before continuing to rely on exposure standards developed three decades ago. Public health protections should keep pace with the technology and the current scientific evidence. **References** 1. Gandhi, O. P., et al. (2012). *Exposure limits: The underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation, especially in children.* Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 31(1), 34–51. doi:10.3109/15368378.2011.622827. 2. Fernández, C., et al. (2018). *Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality.* Environmental Research, 167, 694–699. 3. Aldad, T. S., Gan, G., Gao, X. B., & Taylor, H. S. (2012). *Fetal radiofrequency radiation exposure from 800–1900 MHz-rated cellular telephones affects neurodevelopment and behavior in mice.* Scientific Reports, 2, 312. doi:10.1038/srep00312. 4. Foerster, M., et al. (2018). *A prospective cohort study of adolescents' memory performance and individual brain dose of microwave radiation from wireless communication.* Environmental Health Perspectives, 126(7). 5. Yakymenko, I., et al. (2016). *Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation.* Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. 6. Güler, G., et al. (2012). *The effect of radiofrequency radiation on DNA and lipid damage in female and male infant rabbits.* International Journal of Radiation Biology, 88(4), 367–373. doi:10.3109/09553002.2012.646349. 7. Zothansiama, et al. (2017). *Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations.* Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. 8. Panagopoulos, D. J. (2019). *Comparing DNA damage induced by mobile telephony and other types of man-made electric fields.* Mutation Research – Reviews in Mutation Research, 781, 53–62. 9. Adams, J. A., et al. (2014). *Effect of mobile telephones on sperm quality: A systematic review and meta-analysis.* Environment International, 70, 106–112. 10. Houston, B., et al. (2016). *The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function.* Reproduction. 11. Altun, A., et al. (2018). *Effects of mobile phone exposure on metabolomics in the male and female reproductive systems.* Environmental Research, 167, 700–707. 12. Yahyazadeh, A., Deniz, Ö. G., & Kaplan, A. A. (2018). *The genomic effects of cell phone exposure on the reproductive system.* Environmental Research, 167, 684–693. 13. Falcioni, L., et al. (2018). *Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission.* Environmental Research, 165, 496–503. 14. Belpomme, D., Hardell, L., Belyaev, I., Burgio, E., & Carpenter, D. O. (2018). *Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective.* Environmental Pollution, 242, 643–658. 15. Balmori, A. (2015). *Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife orientation.* Science of the Total Environment, 518–519, 58–60. 16. Cucurachi, S., et al. (2013). *A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF).* Environment International, 51, 116–140. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2012.10.009. 17. Thielens, A., et al. (2018). *Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz.* Scientific Reports, 8, 3924.

I am writing to urge the FCC to reexamine its radiofrequency (RF) exposure guidelines, with particular attention to the potential impact of wireless radiation on children and developing brains. The current FCC guidelines were developed nearly three decades ago, before the widespread use of smartphones, tablets, Wi-Fi-enabled classrooms, wearable devices, and the constant wireless connectivity that now defines daily life for many children. Today's children experience levels and patterns of exposure that were not contemplated when the current standards were adopted. Of particular concern is the growing body of scientific literature examining the effects of RF exposure during critical periods of brain development. For example, Aldad et al. (2012), a Yale University study published in Scientific Reports, found behavioral and neurodevelopmental changes in mice exposed to cellular telephone radiation during gestation. While no single study should dictate regulatory policy, such findings underscore the need for careful review of potential developmental impacts and should not be dismissed without meaningful consideration. Children are not simply smaller adults. They are undergoing rapid neurological development, and they may face a lifetime of cumulative exposure to wireless technologies. Yet there is little public information regarding the actual, real-world RF exposures children experience throughout the school day in increasingly wireless educational environments. Wi-Fi routers, laptops, tablets, smartphones, and other connected devices are now commonplace in classrooms, but the extent and characteristics of these exposures are rarely monitored or publicly reported. The FCC has a special responsibility to ensure that its regulations adequately protect vulnerable populations, including children and pregnant women. At a minimum, the Commission should conduct a transparent review of the current scientific evidence regarding children's health and neurodevelopment, explain how it evaluates studies reporting biological effects at non-thermal exposure levels, and determine whether additional safety factors or updated exposure limits are warranted. The question before the Commission is not whether wireless technology provides tremendous benefits. It unquestionably does. The question is whether exposure standards developed in the 1990s continue to reflect the best available science in a world where children are surrounded by wireless devices from infancy onward. The FCC should ensure that its regulations are based on current evidence and provide an appropriate margin of safety for the nation's children. Thank you for considering these comments.

Is the FCC actually protecting public health? In a 2021 the U.S. court of appeals ruled that the FCC's decision was arbitrary and capricious, finding it failed to show proper review in regards to numerous issues related to public health and the environment. The court issued a mandate that the FCC show proper examination of evidence on its record related to non-cancer health effects (such as impacts to reproduction, brain development and the immune system), long-term exposure, children’s vulnerability, and environmental impacts. If it is indeed true that this is a complex issue and that the FCC needs more time, then why hasn't the FCC stopped the roll out of wireless technology given that it is clear that it is harmful to our biology and mental health? I am citing a study, one of thousands, to remind the FCC that you are an organization that was created to protect human health, and to regulate, not stand by while humans remain vulnerable and negatively affected by the proliferation of wireless technology that invades my personal, professional and social existence. Rao VS, Titushkin IA, Moros EG, Pickard WF, Thatte HS, Cho MR. Nonthermal effects of radiofrequency-field exposure on calcium dynamics in stem cell-derived neuronal cells: elucidation of calcium pathways. Radiat Res. 2008 Mar;169(3):319-29. doi: 10.1667/RR1118.1. PMID: 18302487.

The continued study and update of wireless radiation exposure limits are critical in today's saturated world. The science is already in! I have two grandchildren - most parents assume that if a cell tower is next to their child's school, it must be safe. This is not true! Just look at the average child's daily exposures: (1.) Wi-Fi in the home, (2.) smart home electric, gas and water meters, (3.) classroom white board and router, (4.) school laptop or tablet, (5.) multiple smart toys, (6.) cell towers at school and neighborhood, (7.) cell phones are now used as toys from infancy up, (8.) telecoms push in home Wi-Fi booster devices. *No wonder infertility and colon cancer is at epidemic levels in younger populations. All radiation is cumulative! Please act now to save future generations from RFR harms. "Big Wireless" relies on the media blackout. It is past time to educate and protect our children. Parents deserve to know the truth.

It frightens me that people all around me, close to me when I am eating and relaxing, are using cell phones that are emanating EMF radiation, when I know there is much science that shows that this is harmful to humans. I have always been sensitive to such radiation, and I consider such radiation dangerous to my health and my wellbeing. I especially fear for the next generation given such research as: "Lasting Hepatic Effects of Prenatal Mobile Phone Exposure, Yilmaz,A., et al. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 30 (11):1355-1359 as just one example. The FCC MUST follow the science with its EMF regulations!

Hello, I just want to state that there is no doubt about the adverse effects of wireless radiation. I know the FCC has guidelines regarding this but they are 30 years old and so much has changed since then. We now have 5G and our society is full of wireless devices, it's really unavoidable at this point. I used to have my router and all my network equipment in my bedroom and when I did I had terrible insomnia. Once I moved it to another room my sleep greatly improved. This is just 1 example. There are so many people that I've talked to that have various issues from wireless radiation and there are now thousands of studies verifying their negative effects. Here is just one of them that shows cell phone exposure reduces HRV (heart rate variability) in people which is a huge stress on the nervous system and the body as a whole which is a big deal. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32249199/ There are so many studies showing that the radiation causes tumors, DNA damage, neurological issues, fertility issues, negative effects on wildlife etc. This is a serious matter and I appreciate your attention to this. Thank you.

Independent Science on the Effects of Wireless Radiation on Human Health and the Environment There are more than 1,000 scientific studies conducted by independent researchers from around the world concerning the biological effects of Radiofrequency (RF radiation). Here we present some of the most recent studies. Effects on Fetuses Effects on Children and Adolescents Brain Tumors Parotid Gland Tumors Other Malignancies DNA Damage and Gene Expression Changes Neurological/Cognitive Effects Cardiovascular Effects Male Fertility EMR Syndrome (Electromagnetic Sensitivity) Implanted Medical Devices 5G Effects Wildlife and Plants Reports, Articles and Reviews