Research, evidence & monitoring

I have been haunted by Tinnitus, dizziness, and heart arrhythmia whenever over exposed to the electromagnetic radiation, you as the supposed regulatiory agency continue to promote and authorize the proliferation of. It is widely perceived that You are operating without regard for impact to the health and well being of not only the citizenry but of all living beings within our country and beyond. The examination of public exposure levels and considering the real science in setting new regulations/guidelines is way overdue and should be considered a opportunity to meet the mission of the FCC and begin regaining the trust and respect of the populace and world. Transparency in the process will go a long way in effectively meeting your Court ordered task. FCC should request enhanced non partisan oversight from both subcommittees of the Senate and House and the GAO. Full routine reporting, open records of communications and meetings including voluntary Hearings on and throughout the process will in fact help accomplish the task. NEPA should be performed at levels that suite the biological, scientific and true impacts to the disabled and those suffering from Electrom-Magnetic-Radiation Syndrome. EMRS. This is your opportunity to shine, don't blow it or trade it away.

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!

The world has changed dramatically since the FCC adopted its human exposure guidelines in 1996, based on science from the 1980s. Please read this report: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213879X14000583 A court ruling has determined that the FCC did not properly consider the scientific evidence available when it made its decision NOT to update its human exposure guidelines. It is inconceivable and outrageous that the FCC claims to be protecting public health while it ignores the large and growing body of science showing biological harm even at non-thermal levels. Please consider the evidence regarding the ongoing dangers of wifi use in school classrooms. Thank you, Thom Speidel

Hello, The world and technology has changed dramatically since the FCC adopted its human exposure guidelines in 1996, based on science from the 1980s. It's inconceivable and outrageous that the FCC claims to be protecting public health while it ignores the large and growing body of science showing biological harm even at non-thermal levels. For instance a recently published article in Frontiers Cardiovascular Medicine in February 2025 references a study of the potential for red blood cell aggregation from radiofrequency radiation to occur in the general population. Rouleaux formation due to mobile phone exposure is not good for you. Further studies are needed to assess the incidence of this occurrence, in addition to defining which power densities and frequencies put individuals at risk. The FCC must address studies and reflect the risks and harm of these frequencies to protect the public. Thankyou, Christy White

I am concerned that the FCC has not updated its policies and exposure limit guidelines for RF radiation since 1996, well before the proliferation of RF technologies like cell phones, cell towers and WiFi. These antiquated guidelines were based on plastic and gel models of adult male heads, not on the thin, vulnerable skulls of children or even smaller adults. The BioInitiative Report, first compiled relevant research on these technologies, starting in 2012, with updates in 2014 and 2022. These studies show overwhelmingly that RF radiation negatively affects humans and that certain people who are EMF hypersensitive are profoundly negatively affected. The summaries of these research studies can be found here: https://bioinitiative.org/research-summaries/ I am particularly concerned that the FCC review and retest their guidelines because I became RF sensitive myself after the imposition of a RF transmitting electric (Smart) meter on my home in 2011. The device caused health problems for me. When I sought to have the device removed, I was met with the electric company's argument that it was well under the FCC limit for RF transmissions. The United States is one of the few countries in the world that allow such high RF exposure levels for its citizens. The FCC should revisit and revise these extremely high and harmful limits to protect our health and homes.

I am horrified by the fact that the FCC has not updated its human exposure guidelines in 30 years! Our children are being subjected to experiments with EMFs both in school and at home. The FCC should require evidence that subjecting kids to this radiation from multiple sources for 15-20 hours a day (in school, at home, and in between) is SAFE, rather than the other side having to prove it's dangerous. Please listen to the people (parents, kids, teachers, and others) who have experienced harmful effects of EMFs first-hand. You should be open to the research on this topic as it affects every person in this country, especially kids. Here is just one study: Children Absorb Higher Doses of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation From Mobile Phones Than Adults. Morris, R., et al. IEEE Access: The Journal for Rapid Open Access Publishing Doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2478701. (2015). Thank you for taking a stand!

Subject: Public Comment: Urgent Need to Reevaluate RF Radiation Limits Based on Current Scientific Evidence Dear Federal Communications Commission (FCC), I am a scientist and, as a scientist, I have learned to be careful about my own biases and to keep an open mind about things I don’t fully know or understand. Technology is progressing at unprecedented rates and exposing humanity and all life on Earth to unknown effects. Scientists try to anticipate unwanted consequences of technological developments, but unfortunately, industry interests often contradict cautious development. It is deeply concerning that the FCC continues to maintain that its current safety limits adequately protect public health, while effectively ignoring a large and growing body of peer-reviewed science demonstrating biological harm at non-thermal levels. We are at a critical point in time where we must rigorously assess the risks over the potential benefits. The advent of social media, technology relying on 5G, and the ever-increasing development of energy-consuming artificial intelligence are creating unprecedented pushes on the use of radiofrequency radiation (RFR), making it fully omnipresent. The science already suggests that technology developed more than a decade ago has real biological effects on the central nervous system and cellular health. Key research in this field underscores this reality: • National Toxicology Program (2018): The multi-year NTP rodent study conducted by the U.S. government provided clear evidence of carcinogenic activity (specifically heart schwannomas) and some evidence of malignant brain gliomas linked to non-thermal RFR exposure. • Hardell et al. (2013): Extensive epidemiological pooled analyses demonstrated a statistically significant association between long-term mobile and cordless phone use and increased risks for glioma and acoustic neuroma. • Coureau et al. (2014): The French national CERENAT case-control study found significantly higher risks for central nervous system tumors, including gliomas and meningiomas, among heavy, long-term mobile phone users. With recent technological developments, it is absolutely necessary to revisit these studies, further them, ensure new studies are conducted by independent scientists not affiliated with industry, and actually heed their findings. It is time for the FCC to take meaningful action to update safety guidelines and protect humanity from these uncontrolled technological developments. Sincerely, Barbara Cerf-Allen, PhD.

As a registered nurse and mother,I am concerned about the constant and uncalculated exposure of nonionizing radiation we are exposed to. Just because it’s nonionizing- does not mean it’s not damaging. Studies have shown increased oxidative stress, increased histamine response and increased mood and behavioral challenges. We cannot ignore this issue. We must research and in the meanwhile reduce and remove WiFi from healthcare and school settings. I also do not want to be exposed to neighboring buildings and public installments of WiFi as I feel we do not know the effects because we have failed to look for the real effects of this technology. It’s clear we are getting less well as a population- that chronic disease is exploding. We cannot just keep saying it’s idiopathic- we must investigate what is different about this generational exposures- even if it’s inconvenient, expensive, and multi factorial. Thank you, Tracy Navar

The world has changed dramatically since the FCC adopted its human exposure guidelines in 1996, based on science from the 1980s. It's inconceivable and outrageous that the FCC claims to be protecting public health while it ignores the large and growing body of science showing biological harm even at non-thermal levels. . The science and data is readily available and the FCC has turned a blind eye for way too many years. It is time to do the right thing and update these exposure guidelines in a manner that falls in line with the current scientific data, For example this study shows how detrimental exposure is to our children (and children represent future of our country). This is just one of a plethora of studies available on PubMed https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31927574/ The data in 1000's of studies like this show that that current guidelines are outdated nowhere near accurate for the current sea of wireless radiation we are bathed in day after day without our consent. These guidelines MUST be updated to provide the level of safety Americans should be able to expect from their government.

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.