Exposure limits & testing

Following the installation of 5G antennas in 2021 on the roof of a neighboring building : Mid-February 2024, strange headaches appear, with a runny nose. My histamine level high, which is a characteristic marker of intolerance to electromagnetic waves. I take metro line 3 In Paris and inside the carriage, my legs are suddenly electrified. I could no longer walk. My legs had become as if on fire. Mid-June 2024, still inside the carriage of line 3 in the metro, this time the entire body is electrified, at Saint-Lazare station in Paris. Mid-August 2024, a new neighbor with a 5 Ghz router, and my face and my entire body began to burn. An association advised me to take shelter in my cellar. Luckily I had one, to escape the burning sensations. I am in possession of three medical certificates that I can send to you personally upon your request: • The first certifying my intolerance to electromagnetic waves from August 26, 2024. • Medical certificate from September 9, 2024, diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy at Henri-Mondor Hospital. Reason for the examination: investigation of neuropathy in the presence of pain like electric shocks and stabbing sensations, initially in the lower limbs then diffuse, onset in February 2024 at the same time as intolerance to electromagnetic fields. Physiology and functional exploration department, at Henri-Mondor University Hospital Center. • Another, certifying my EHS, electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome, on On July 24, 2026 Here is a very interesting read for you: Radiofrequency radiation-induced gene expression Revue / Source : Reviews on Environmental Health. Publication en ligne anticipée. Lien : https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2025-0104 In light of these severe health impacts, I urge the FCC to apply the precautionary principle (as recognized in international environmental standards, such as Principle 15 of the 1992 Rio Declaration) and revise its obsolete RF exposure guidelines under 47 CFR § 1.1307 to truly protect human health.

I am a mother and a public school teacher. I am filing in Proceeding 13-84 on the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health effects of long-term exposure, and the growth of wireless infrastructure since the Commission last updated its limits. My family lives near commercial radio broadcast towers, and a cellular antenna was later installed nearby, mounted on power lines, without notice to residents. We could find no public registration or record of it. Since living with this exposure, my family has experienced serious health effects, including complications in both of my pregnancies that affected my children. After the cellular antenna was installed, both my husband and I had changes documented in our bloodwork in the same month, with no change in our diet or lifestyle. We were both healthy and active. My doctor has advised that we have done everything we can medically and that we need to move away from the sources of radiation. We are now relocating at significant cost. Long-term exposure and technological change The Commission's RF limits date to 1996. They do not account for continuous, around-the-clock exposure from multiple sources, such as broadcast towers and cell antennas near the same home. Exposure at home continues through the night, when the body needs to rest and carry out its cellular repair. This makes installations near homes especially harmful, because there is no break from exposure during the hours the body depends on most for recovery. RF sources are also increasingly being added in office buildings, hospitals, and schools, so people are exposed at work, during medical care, and at school, then come home to more exposure. There is no break. Wireless infrastructure has expanded enormously since 1996, and families now live with constant exposure they never chose. Children Children absorb more RF radiation than adults, as their brains are not yet fully myelinated, which impacts their neurological development. Exposure during pregnancy not only affects the mother's health during and after pregnancy, but can cause irreversible damage to the developing baby. As a teacher, I see how much RF exposure children have during the school day, including from Wi-Fi routers in classrooms and RF sources placed near playgrounds. Current limits do not protect them. Request The Commission's limits and testing procedures are based on preventing tissue heating. This does not reflect the effects of RF radiation on cellular function, and it does not represent the increased risk for children and pregnant women. I ask the Commission to study the biological effects of RF radiation on cellular function, not only heating. Rather than setting new exposure limits, I ask that this exposure be avoided altogether where people live, learn, and heal: RF installations should not be placed near homes, schools, childcare facilities, hospitals, or playgrounds. I also ask that every installation, including antennas on power lines and utility poles, be listed in a searchable public registry.

PUBLIC COMMENT — HHS DOCKET HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Submitted by: Slowphone Brasil Slowphone Brasil advocates for healthier and safer use of technology. We urge the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to reassess electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure standards, consider the scientific evidence already available, and prioritize public health and the protection of life over commercial interests. 1. REASSESS EXPOSURE LIMITS Current radiofrequency (RF) exposure standards should be independently reassessed in light of peer-reviewed research reporting biological effects and potential health concerns below existing guidelines. The review should address voltage-gated calcium channels, oxidative stress and peroxynitrite pathways, blood-brain barrier permeability, and tumors, including gliomas and schwannomas. HHS should evaluate the US National Toxicology Program studies and the Ramazzini Institute's 2018 findings alongside epidemiological research, systematic reviews and subsequent evidence. Animal findings and proposed mechanisms should be distinguished from proven human causation, without dismissing relevant evidence because scientific uncertainty remains. 2. ENSURE SCIENTIFIC INDEPENDENCE HHS should examine conflicts of interest, funding sources, professional affiliations and evidence-selection methods in organizations whose recommendations inform exposure standards, including ICNIRP. Relevant concerns should be assessed through verifiable documents, declarations of interest and transparent review procedures. Independent experts should evaluate the full body of evidence, including findings that challenge existing assumptions. 3. ADOPT MORE PROTECTIVE INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKS We propose an international outdoor RF reference level of 100,000 µW/m² (0.1 W/m²) for consideration and scientific evaluation. HHS should compare US standards with current regulations in Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, France, Poland, Italy and Israel, identifying more protective approaches and the rationale behind them. Comparisons must specify frequency, averaging periods, measurement conditions and whether values are binding limits or precautionary targets. 4. REDUCE EXPOSURE AT SOURCE HHS should promote a comprehensive strategy to reduce unnecessary exposure while maintaining essential communications. Wireless routers should provide effective low-emission modes, adjustable transmission power and automatic reduction of unnecessary transmissions. JRS ECO technology may serve as a technical reference, subject to independent testing. Public institutions, schools, hospitals, childcare facilities and workplaces should prioritize wired Ethernet connections where practical, reducing dependence on Wi-Fi in locations occupied for long periods. Wireless networks should be deployed only where needed, with access points configured to avoid unnecessary transmission power. Consumers should have access to mobile phones with low specific absorption rates (SAR), transparent and comparable exposure information, and easy-to-use settings that reduce unnecessary transmissions. Hands-free use, speakerphone use and keeping active devices away from the body when practical should be encouraged. HHS should also evaluate exposure from cellular infrastructure, small cells, Internet of Things devices, wearables, smart meters and emerging wireless technologies. Infrastructure planning should consider exposure in homes, schools and other sensitive locations. 5. PROTECT CHILDREN AND SENSITIVE SETTINGS Public-health guidance should give particular attention to children, pregnancy and fetal development. Schools and childcare facilities should favor wired connections where feasible and adopt practical exposure-reduction measures. Public procurement policies should consider low-emission connectivity options and transparent technical specifications. 6. ADDRESS DIRTY ELECTRICITY HHS should support independent, reproducible research on high-frequency electrical noise conducted through wiring, sometimes called dirty electricity. Proposed filters should be assessed through standardized measurements before and after installation; health benefits should not be presumed without reliable evidence. Measurement methods and units must be clearly defined. 7. WARN AND INFORM THE PUBLIC HHS should consider prominent graphical health-information labels on RF-emitting devices and products, inspired by tobacco warnings. Labels should explain that exposure and scientific uncertainty exist and provide practical ways to reduce unnecessary exposure. A broad public-awareness campaign, drawing on documented initiatives in Cyprus, should explain exposure sources, research findings, uncertainties and preventive options. Environmental measurements should be publicly accessible and report RF in µW/m², electric-field strength in V/m, and magnetic-field strength in nT. Dirty electricity requires separate, clearly defined measurement methods. 8. GLOBAL ACTION AND TRANSPARENCY The United States should encourage international cooperation on independent research, standardized environmental monitoring, public disclosure of measurement results and periodic reassessment of exposure limits. Publicly funded research should disclose conflicts of interest and funding sources, publish results regardless of outcome, and enable independent verification. OUR PRINCIPAL REQUESTS 1. Reassess existing RF exposure limits and evaluate an international outdoor reference level of 100,000 µW/m². 2. Implement a broad public-awareness campaign and promote practical exposure-reduction measures worldwide. 3. Introduce prominent graphical warnings on RF-emitting products and strengthen protections in schools and other sensitive settings. Public health and the protection of life must take precedence over commercial interests. HHS should act on existing evidence, improve scientific transparency and advance proportionate preventive measures without waiting for every uncertainty to be resolved. REFERENCES IARC. Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. Monographs, Volume 102 (2013). https://publications.iarc.who.int/126 US National Toxicology Program. Technical Reports 595 and 596 (2018). https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/apptoxres/cartox Italy. Law No. 36 of 22 February 2001. https://www.parlamento.it/parlam/leggi/01036l.htm

My life has been horribly effected by wireless technology. The lives of millions of people are being harmed on a daily basis by today's wireless world. FCC's RF exposure guidelines for the omnipresence of wireless devices and technological developments were last updated in 1996. This is the same as thirty years ago that leaded gasoline was still considered OK. Thirty years ago cell phones were bulky, expensive devices primarily used for making calls and sending texts. The cell phones were so expensive very few people used them. Now, the world is full of wireless technology. The fact that the FCC has not updated the guidelines is the same as still allowing people to smoke in the neonatal (new babies) area of the hospital and on airplanes. It is vital to update the exposure guidelines. Please refer to 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's job is to protect consumers. Currently consumers are being harmed on a constant basis by wireless technology. It is the FCC's job to fix this terrible problem.

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.

To whom it may concern: Oct. 13 2026 In 2018, we moved into our home in Geneva, Florida. My wife almost immediately started having convulsions with blackouts multiple times daily. Because she had brain surgery before, she went back to her Neurologist. After extensive testing and trying many medications, The Neurologist. could not identify a cause. Nothing stopped the convulsions or the blackouts. Her days were reduced to getting up every morning and sitting down with a bowl of ice water in her lap. She would place a cold, wet washcloth on her forehead between convulsions. This went on all day long for months. She was physically exhausted which caused memory loss and disorientation. During this time, a close friend sent an email containing a video of a woman talking about Smart Meters used by electric companies that might be a fire hazard. We were unaware of Smart Meters. After watching the video, we checked to see if we had one on our home. We did. It was located on the exterior of our bedroom wall, about eighteen inches from our heads where we slept. We looked online for our power company's website. There the Power Company explained that the meter was transmitting (pulsing) RF signals a few seconds a day and was harmless. I was an aviation electronics technician specializing in airborne side-looking radar and infrared photography in the Navy. Upon leaving the Navy, I worked in the Telephony Industry during the development and deployment of wireless telephone systems and telephones. So, I questioned the frequency of signals the Smart Meter was transmitting and how often they were being transmitted. I rented a NARDA SRM-3006 meter. With it, I was able to measure the number of transmissions and the magnitude of the pulses which were in the 10,000 µW/m² range. Also, I saw when the transmissions occurred. The transmissions were numerous and spread throughout the day and night (24/7). My wife had titanium sutures implanted in her head from her previous brain surgery. I was concerned that these signals might be triggering the convulsions. The family shielded another bedroom in our house to shelter her. The convulsions with blackouts ceased. Many doctors expressed doubt about her condition and refused to help. She decided go back to see the GP who had been her doctor for many years, hoping he might understand. After explaining to him precisely what had occurred, he began to laugh. We asked what was funny and he explained. He had been having heart palpitations and periods of shortness of breath. After testing, he was unable to find a cause. It was then he learned that his office was located directly under the WI-FI router for the entire multi-storied building his office was in. He had his office rooms painted with shielding paint. His cardiac symptoms diminished. Because the RF signals were rapidly increasing with newer technology, when my wife went out into public communities, she began having more intense and longer lasting convulsions with blackouts. I began having to take her to the hospital to gain control. She started wearing a silver lined head covering to help shield herself from the waves. Because the RF signals were becoming endemic, we decided to relocate to a safer environment. In 2023 , we purchased an old farm in West Virginia's Quiet Zone. Even here she has to use shielding due to the wide use of wireless devices, IE, cell phones which can produce 5G signals in ranges of 350,000 to over 2,500,000 µW/m² range, WI-FI signals over 10,000 µW/m² , Bluetooth devices with signals over 6,500 µW/m² , and the deployment of 5G frequencies. Yes, even here in the “quiet zone” many people never turn off their cell phones. Although their phones will not work, they still transmit RF signals. So, the use of higher frequencies still penetrate her shielding and can again cause convulsions and blackouts. Here are two examples: Due to a product recall my CPAC machine was replaced in June 2024. The new machine was installed immediately and put into use. During the night, my wife had severe convulsions. Using a Safe and Sound Pro II Broadband RF Meter, I was able to find the source of the signals that triggered her convulsions. My new CPAC unit was emitting Bluetooth signals in the 4000 to 6000 µW/m² range. I was able to turn the Bluetooth off using the CPAP controls. My wife had two nights of peaceful sleep. On the third night, she had severe convulsions again. With the meter, I learned that the new CPAP unit had independently turned the Bluetooth signals on again. Consequently, I had to repeatedly reset the Bluetooth controls to off prior to the third day automatic re-activation. In September 2025, I was visiting a neighbor. Because of their home WIFI, my wife sat in our car. His wife went out to speak with my wife. While they were conversing, my wife began to convulse. Our neighbor's wife ran back to her house and told me my wife was not well. I quickly saw what was happening and removed my wife from the area. I went back to the neighbor's home with the meter. The neighbor's wife had recently replaced her hearing aids. Her new hearing aids were both emitting Bluetooth signals in the 1050- 2000 µW/m² range. Recently, a physicist in Canada suggested my wife try using two silver lined shields (one over the other) and for the most part it now blocks the higher frequencies. We do not know if she will be able to shelter from satellite waves which are in the 18 GHz frequency range which can be detected with the Safe and Sound Pro mm Wave Broadband RF Meter 20 – 40 GHz. These increasing high frequencies and their extensive deployment causes my wife to live in isolation and be constantly shielded. Thank you for putting public health first. Meter #'s used: Safe and Sound Pro II Broadband RF Meter 200 MHz – 8 GHz Acoustimeter RF Meter Model AM-10 200 MHz – 8 GHz Safe and Sound Pro mm Wave Broadband RF Meter 20 – 40 GHz WIFI signals in medical waiting Rm: 5200 µW/m² Cell phone activated using 5G: 2,5000,000 µW/m²

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 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.