Research, evidence & monitoring

There is not adequate research done for us to proceed. Please review and hold! Melnick, R. L., Moskowitz, J. M., & International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). (2026). Exposure limits to radiofrequency EMF do not account for cancer risk or reproductive toxicity assessed from data in experimental animals. Environmental Health, 25(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6 International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). (2022). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: Implications for 5G. Environmental Health, 21(1), 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9

Complete top to bottom regulatory capture. We need a national smart meter opt out on individual residences for all types of technologies for every utility available, electricity, natural gas, water, and beyond. Local energy and utility companies consistently refuse to offer opt outs, charge punitive pricing for those whom refuse smart grid systems, refuse to listen, deceive customers about the dangers of these technological items, and force us to have them on our homes. We want cell towers of all kinds removed from all public parks and public schools for similar safety concern reasons. We were supposed to have low priced broadband and fiber optic access, which is what 1990's infrastructure built out subsidies and grants were intended for. Instead the telecom companies hijacked the infrastructure and sold everyone high price cellular instead, built on the backbone of the fiberoptic network the public paid for, for public benefit and low priced access. The biological damage from these technologies goes far beyond thermal heating. Bees and pollinators are at historically low numbers, we are experiencing an insect and other biological forms of life die off on this planet. Please will someone force a removal of the never ending new satellites in the sky and get that under control immediately? We do not need to blanket the entire earth with wireless access emf fields. The corporations pushing these technologies are clearly unchecked and effectively unregulated at this point. We need additional investment in fiberoptic with public access everywhere there may be sub standard connectivity. The last thing we need anywhere is another technological smart device or spyware data broker collection device anywhere. Get every single one of these out of our public areas immediately please. Keep it wired. Keep it safe. From wireless devices within the homes, for entertainment, work purposes, the unwelcome injection of synching devices pervading everything everywhere, clearly there is no regulatory check to these industries. These have deleterious and cumulative negative effects on human health, down to the cellular level. The damage builds the more emf field exposure is present. Yet the industry and captured government agencies insist on ignoring studies and scientific proof from around the world the harms these new technologies cause. At this point it may be better for medical professionals to prescribe safe limits because there is nowhere anyone can turn for valid safety or meaningful privacy advisement from within the government agencies whom allegedly oversee these industries. We want 3glte systems available again. The ewaste generated from these forced transitions to 4glte or higher is incredible and wasteful. We want our qwerty flip phones back. The kind without all the monitoring capability, built in spyware, and dangerous high frequency emf generating fields like all the 'modern' phones. The amount of fraud, spam of all sorts, is clearly out of control and unchecked on these systems too. From smart devices of all sorts to every day phones, there needs to be new rules prohibiting all types of unwelcome communication and solicitation. Real penalties for scammers whom never ever stop and have created a billions of dollar a year industry defrauding Americans. We're forced to have these devices through a myriad of ways or denied normal societal access, then there is no effective oversight to prevent harm and abuse of the systems integrations. The bees are dying. The trees are dying. The soils are increasingly contaminated. Yet big industry continues to pull the strings of government. The waste fraud and abuse has truly reached epic levels. This is not the bright future of technology we were promised. As the surveillance network builds at a rapid pace all around us, tyranny on the horizon. All it takes to turn these technologies into tools of control and harm is a policy change. The very last thing anyone needs is another data center and we're also in desperate need of right to be forgotten type laws, strict limitations on data gathering of data brokers and the corporations they deal with. We want our fourth amendment right to privacy back immediately. The wireless infrastructure and IOT network of devices is a key part in the erosion of civil liberties, ongoing abusive process by these corporations whom build, deploy, utilize, and profit from the devices presence. When do we as consumers get a meaningful opt out option? We're all opted in without consent then are not allowed to opt out? Nobody does anything about this as they ignore privacy and safety advocates from around the world whom have irrefutably proved harm? That is regulatory capture. Save the bees. If you don't care about rights and health of humans, at least save the bees. Our food supply depends on them. The emf fields decimate pollinators even worse than chemical pollution. Endless studies, ignored.

Thank you for reading this. Please do what is right for our children and our children’s children. You’ll find cell phone radiation is very similar to tobacco. Cell phones are very addictive and have a significant, detrimental health effects and sadly the impact won’t be discovered until years after extraordinary damage has already been done. Please step up and do what is right for the health and wellbeing of humanity and frankly all life on the planet. For the radiation is harmful to all living beings (plants, animals and humans). Many have died do to the effects of cellphone radiation. Many others suffer daily. Many are completely unaware of the dangers and the long term harm being created.Please, Please, please protect the public rather than corporate profits. In 2019 a colleague of mine facilitated the passage, in Oregon, of SB283 which was to review science to determine whether children in schools are safe being exposed to high power wi-fi routers and other wireless devices in the classroom. The bill passed unanimously in the Senate and overwhelmingly in the House. While lobbying the bill and gathering information he interviewed 2 children who had to leave school due to microwave sickness caused by RF in the school. He also met 2 teachers, one in Los Angeles with the same condition. The teacher in L.A. sued the school and won the lawsuit. The results of the science review by the Oregon Health Authority, quoting the first draft: "All studies showed worse health outcomes, all studies showed harm to reproductive organs..." The draft was withheld from a FOIA request and later obtained by journalist, Dan Forbes, who wrote a lengthy article about the corrupt handling and the crime committed by OHA in withholding from a FOIA request. In addition, commercial insurance companies will no longer insure for "harm from exposure to electromagnetic frequencies" This is an industry wide practice that has taken affect years ago. Cell telephone advertising shows people with the phone against their heads yet companies warn to keep the phone an inch from the body. I always wonder if legislators or others in high profile agencies and organizations that are compromised by industry money ever consider they are doing harm by defrauding science, writing phony reports, and controlling the narrative in deceiving the public that they are safe. A brief historical summary of those involved with passing the previously mentioned Oregon Senate Bill 283 Prof. Paul Héroux, Professor of Toxicology and Health Effects of Electromagnetism at the McGill University flew to Portland from Montreal to testify on behalf of SB 283, only to return to Monreal the following day. Prof. Héroux developed a Unified Theory of Weak Magnetic Field Action that proposes A radical new outlook. Dr. Paul Dart, an Environmental Physician of Eugene, Oregon, makes invisible electromagnetic radiation visible, using his instrument, as he testifies at the Senate. The term Electromagnetic Medicine has, over the years, meant researchers in laboratories looking to use electromagnetic radiation to treat diseases. Dr. Dart gives it a new, clinical meaning, in the protection of Lucia, 14 years old, who testified below. L---a (a minor) attended school while positioned just below a WiFi router. At 9 years old, she became ill with nausea and rashes, and for over a year saw 7 doctors before her family realized that she was made sick by the WiFi radiation. Her mother switched her to the only school available that did not have WiFi, and she recovered. Graduating from her current school, she is now looking to continue her studies in an environment that will not make her sick. Senator Laurie Monnes-Anderson introduced the bill as a legislator and retired public health nurse. Monnes-Anderson is also a former school board member and the mother of two children who attended Oregon public schools. She understands the strengths and weaknesses of our public education system and has become well versed in the potential risks of long term exposure to microwave radiation in the classroom environment and made a special appearance at the hearing to speak in support of the bill.

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 infants and 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 support only human and non-animals studies. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. I am a healthcare professional. I have seen substantial scientific evidence that has been collected for some time about how wireless radiation has deleterious effects on the public, especially on infants and children, whose cells are turning over rapidly, causing a chain reaction of negative effects on their development. The damage also occurs in adults, animals, wildlife and plants. Some countries have already heeded this information to put into place safety regulations to protect them. 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.

The current limits on EMF/GSM-like RF exposure on the human population must be re-examined in light of the increasing use of cell phones, Wi-Fi, cell towers and small cells, smart meters, Bluetooth AirPods, 5G, and emerging 6G technologies. Children are reportedly especially vulnerable in that they absorb higher rates of RF radiation. More and more studies are confirming severe neurotoxic effects. See Neurotoxic effects of 3.5 GHz GSM-like RF exposure on cultured DRG neurons: a mechanistic insight into oxidative and apoptotic pathways. Bektas H, Seker A, Ustun R, Dogu S, 2026. The current limits relating to "heating tissue" are insufficient to protect the human population. I am requesting that the FCC conduct specific research on the true effects of radiation on humans, animals, and any living tissue. The ever increasing levels of radiation are deleteriously affecting all of us. I request that you take immediate action to protect us from further harm and institute truly safe limits.

The FCC needs to revise radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. Wireless radiation is a toxin that affects many people (and other organisms) in many different ways. I, for example, experience pulsatile tinnitus that is made worse with increased WiFi and other wireless radiation from smartphones and other wireless tech. Multiple MD/ENT visits and a brain MRI could not reveal any info on this or address any cause, as the medical establishment generally remains ignorant of wireless radiation issues, which is in part caused by failure of the FCC, as a national regulatory body, to properly study and establish safety regulations that actually keep people and the environment safe. I’ve deduced that radiation affects ion channel function in my ear, as it’s like my inner ear is spasming when the pulsatile tinnitus occurs. I also developed “trigger thumb” at exactly the spot where I used to hold my phone all the time. After getting a meter, I saw that the highest radiation in my phone is right where I used to hold it. Needless to say, I no longer hold my phone that way- in fact, I try to touch my phone as little as possible. There are also concerns from radiation that is clearly present even feet away from the phone (which I can measure with the meter!). There is actually a lot of research from around the world, but the two studies below are examples that explain potential mechanisms for the issues I’ve personally experienced from emf/communications radiation: BioInitiative Report (2012, with Subsequent Research Updates): https://bioinitiative.org/updated-research-summaries/ Panagopoulos et al. (2021): https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/ijo.2021.5272 The FCC has not addressed the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. I also 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 both MCAS and EDS (both medically diagnosed by doctors) and non ionizing radiation/wifi/Bluetooth trigger horrendous neurological, vestibular, nerve, dysautonomua symptoms. I have become disabled as a result. There are literally zero studies showing safety and again literally thousands of scientific studies showing human harm and detailing that harm. Radiation exposure limits in the US are TEN TIMES that of Italy. What ever happened to “First Do No Harm”? I could go on but I don’t know how many characters I have left. All I can say is that irradiating people without any scientific or medical studies is crazy.

Children's schools should not be located near mobile phone towers or TV towers or electrical transmission power lines. And the powerful Wi-Fi routers often used in schools should not be near any children's desks. California officially issued guidelines advising of mobile phone dangers, warning of increased risk of brain cancer and other health problems, and that children’s developing brains could be at greater risk. The biggest source of RF exposure for most people is using a mobile phone next to the head. You can reduce RF exposure a lot by using the phone's speaker and holding the phone farther away from your head, or using wired headphones say neuro-oncologists & public heath experts. The city council in Berkeley California passed a law that requires retailers to tell consumers how far away their phone should be held. The European Union recommends wired Internet rather than wireless in schools. France also banned WiFi routers in nursery and daycare centers, and restricted elementary school WiFi to only when in use for education. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) states in an open letter to school superintendents, “There is a consistent, emerging science that shows people, especially children who are more vulnerable due to developing brains and thinner skulls, are being affected by the increasing exposure to wireless radiation.” In 2021 a New Hampshire report outlined health risks of cell phone towers in residential neighborhoods. Scientific American reported a study of mobile phone exposure and cancer in rats: www.scientificamerican.com/article/major-cell-phone-radiation-study-reignites-cancer-questions/ According to Dr. Joel Moskowitz (UC/Berkeley), "The study's results reinforce the need for more stringent regulation of radiofrequency radiation and better disclosure of the health risks associated with wireless technologies." Dr. Martha Herbert, a Harvard Pediatrician, wrote in this letter to Montgomery County Schools "there are thousands of papers...that document adverse health and neurological impacts of EMF/RFR"..."Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation from wifi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function"..."Powerful industrial entities have a vested interest in leading the public to believe that EMF/RFR, which we cannot see, taste or touch, is harmless, but this is not true". The American Academy of Pediatrics in 2013 requested a review of EMF radiation emissions from technology devices, citing impact on children. Some schools have reduced WiFi exposure of children: https://ehtrust.org/tag/wifi-in-schools/ https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/school-wifi-networks-could-put-12602188 In 2011 the World Health Organization classified cell phones (and other wireless devices) as a possible carcinogen due to RF emissions. In 2013 Dr. Anthony Miller from University of Toronto School of Public Health recommended that based on new research, radio frequency (RF) exposure should be reclassified as a probable carcinogen. Regarding power lines: Researchers have found health effects, including a doubling of leukemia rates associated with living in AC magnetic field strengths greater than 4.0 mG. www.emfs.info/health/leukaemia/ www.powerwatch.org.uk/elf/overview.asp www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10944614 www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20877339 www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11055621 The Swedish National Energy Department issued an advisory warning that schools, playgrounds, and day-care centers should not be sited near power lines, and that children should not be subjected for long periods every day to AC magnetic fields over 3.0 mG.

Public Comment to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
ET Docket No. 13-84: Reassessment of RF Exposure Limits I urge the FCC to open a new proceeding to reassess its radio frequency (RF) exposure limits and work directly with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to ensure that those limits reflect current scientific evidence, including potential biological effects beyond tissue heating. Wireless infrastructure has expanded dramatically, with antennas and cell towers appearing on schools, apartment buildings, and near people's homes. Wi-Fi, smart meters, and wireless devices are now widespread, often with limited public discussion about potential health and environmental impacts or the availability of alternatives. I have personally experienced headaches, nausea, feeling unwell, neck and chest tightness, ringing in my ears, and a hot, tingling sensation in my hand when holding a cell phone. I have noticed differences in how I feel under certain wireless conditions, including when using Wi-Fi compared with a wired Ethernet connection. I recognize these experiences do not establish causation, but I believe they warrant serious consideration and further independent research. The FCC should not rely solely on protection against excessive tissue heating without transparently evaluating the broader scientific evidence concerning possible biological effects. I ask the Commission to: 1. Open a new proceeding to review and update its RF exposure limits. 2. Work with HHS and independent researchers to evaluate the latest evidence on potential biological effects, including effects not explained by heating. 3. Improve public access to exposure measurements, the scientific basis for safety standards, and any remaining uncertainties. 4. Consider practical alternatives, including wired technologies, and the environmental and community impacts of expanding wireless infrastructure. 5. Provide meaningful opportunities for public participation before finalizing revised standards. I am also concerned about who benefits financially from the rapid expansion of wireless infrastructure and whether commercial interests are receiving greater consideration than public health, environmental protection, and informed public choice. I urge the FCC to take concrete action, commission a transparent review, and work with HHS to ensure that its standards are informed by the full body of credible scientific evidence. The public deserves transparency, accountability, and a meaningful voice in decisions that affect our homes and communities. Thank you for considering my comments.

I am writing to you in the hope of having your attention on the subject of renewable energy and telecommunication energies, as well as their consequences for livestock farms, and I refer to the interview you had with journalist A. Bercoff on Sud Radio in FRANCE. on 06/11/2025. I share with you the observation that the deployment of its energies stems from an ideology, that this deployment is made on the basis of completely incomplete impact studies, that our animals are indeed sensory sentinels, the verification of this being the increase in the number of farms concerned in connection with the increase in the number of people who have become electrosensitive. It is clear that these intermittent energies are very costly in terms of European funds and various forms of financing, that their profitability is difficult to envisage even in the long term, and that it is imperative to integrate their consequences on living organisms as a whole. For several years, even decades, farmers like ourselves (my husband and I) have been warning about the loss of production and the loss of animals they suffer after a renewable energy installation or a telecommunication relay antenna (2,3,4,5G) positioned themselves close to their farms, or even at distances of more than 10 km. As for our personal situation: we are arboriculturalist farmers in Creuse and we undergo 6 relay antennas around our farm, which covers a hundred hectares spread over a diameter of 3 klm. On this diameter of 3 klm, 6 relay antennas were erected in 2 years after COVID. 2 are really close to our farm (100m). We suffered huge losses (herd, finances, damage to our health) We, the breeders, call on the authorities without anything significant happening; on the contrary, for our part, controls continue and follow one another. We spoke to independent experts