Wildlife & environment

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

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. 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: My son is diagnosed with Level III Autism. He is nonverbal and in diapers at 18 years old. He spends his entire day and often night spinning and howling. We live in the city surrounded by more and more towers. However, when I take my son out of the city where there are few to no towers within many miles, he is a different child. The spinning and howling stops. He sleeps soundly through the night. He is so happy. When we return home the spinning starts again. The sleepless nights continue. I've tested this now dozens of times. His brain is completely scrambled in the city but his body feels peace and calm far from the technology. He is my canary. Everyone who sees it knows what is happening to him and to the rest of us, even though we cannot feel what he feels. 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.

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.

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.

I first noticed a reaction to electromagnetic radiation in 2008. At the time, I was working as an IT manager and was responsible for setting up mobile and wireless devices for employees. I began experiencing a sensation of electrical disturbance or mild electric shock when the devices were held close to my head or body. The sensation was difficult to describe but I would compare it to the feeling of having a “static TV” inside my body. I found it difficult to concentrate, felt nauseous and dizzy when this happened. At the time I had no knowledge of EMF or EMR and ignored the strange sensations. As the years passed, I began noticing these sensations more frequently and with greater intensity, coinciding with the proliferation of cell towers, Wi-Fi and mobile devices. At the time, I knew very little about the potential effects of radiation exposure but I naturally began avoiding it as much as possible. I simply knew that I felt better when I was not in proximity of wireless devices so I used phones and computers connected through wired connections rather than wireless technology. In 2018, after several weeks of commuting to work by train, my reactions to radiation exposure became significantly more severe. Almost overnight, I began experiencing symptoms that developed into chronic fatigue syndrome. During rush hour in Chicago, I observed that train cars were often filled with an estimated 50–75 people actively using mobile phones in each car. This was a striking contrast to my commutes in 2008, when I recall seeing no more than about 10 people using mobile devices in a train car. Over that decade, I had witnessed a dramatic increase in the use of wireless devices in crowded public spaces, while my own symptoms had become progressively more intense. This health issue forced me to take a leave of absence and eventually resign from my position as an IT Manager. My symptoms had become so debilitating that I could no longer fulfill my professional responsibilities or tolerate the daily commute to work. After visiting several doctors, I was told that nothing appeared to be medically wrong with me, as their examinations and tests had not identified any underlying health issues. Despite the severity of my symptoms and the profound impact they had on my ability to work and carry on with daily life, I was left without a clear explanation for what I was experiencing. I began researching my condition independently and came across a TEDx talk on YouTube titled “Wireless Wake-Up Call” by Jeromy Johnson. His presentation resonated deeply with me, as the experiences he described closely mirrored what I had been experiencing. This discovery prompted me to explore grounding as a way to manage my symptoms. After I began grounding, I noticed what felt like an immediate improvement in my condition. Within a few months my chronic fatigue had subsided and I was able to function normally again. Although my chronic fatigue improved significantly, I continued to experience the same sensations when exposed to high levels of electromagnetic fields. Living in Chicago has become increasingly challenging and I have to be selective about the areas I visit. Unfortunately I avoid certain areas of the city, including parts of downtown, where the deployment of 5G towers has saturated the environment with radiation. Thank you for taking the time to consider this important issue. I urge the government to review and update existing safety standards for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and electromagnetic radiation (EMR) exposure to ensure they reflect the latest scientific research and findings. I believe a more comprehensive, evidence-based approach to evaluating potential health risks is essential to protecting public health and ensuring that safety guidelines keep pace with the rapid expansion of wireless technology.

My name is Mana Washio, and I currently live inSpringfield, MA. I became EHS in 2013, when my husband and I lived in Watertown, MA. While we were on vacation, NSTAR came and installed a bank of infamous Smart Meters. Our bedroom was surrounded by them, and there were also two circuit breaker panels underneath our bedroom (because we lived on the 1st floor). We also had a WiFi router in our bedroom, without knowing its harm. Immediately after the Smart Meter installation, I started having piercing headaches, as if someone was inserting an ice pick into my brain. It was SO bad, I could not sleep at all. I also developed all sorts of GI issues, heart palpitation, chest pain, concentration difficulties, and so on. My symptoms subsided when I went away from my home, and it became worse when I came home. I also felt VERY strong pain standing right in front of the Smart Meters outside, so I knew what was causing the problem. EHS diagnosis was extremely difficult to attain, because there are VERY few doctors who could diagnose. I was only able to get one in 2022, after moving to RI. I was a performing musician for many years, but large concert venues where people gather with their cell phones became the hardest place to work. I was forced to completely switch my career, and now I work from home as a Health Coach & a Reiki practitioner. Although I love my current job, I had to start all over and had completely different training before I was able to start making decent salary. In July 2023, I took the National Board Exam for Health and Wellness Coaching. 3 years ago in 2020, I actually took the same exam but miserably failed, due to the severe short-term memory and vision issues I developed due to the high EMF exposure at the test site. Even though I had requested, I was not given any accommodations I needed. So I forced myself to go into the test center. In 2023, I submitted the accommodation request again, along with the formal EHS diagnosis from MD and two supporting letters. I also explained what happened to me 3 years ago. But they did not give me the necessary accommodations right away. My accommodation request was only granted after I wrote the 3rd letter to them, quoting directly from the Department of Justice website, under the “Exams and Courses” section for people with disability. After the approval, I was finally able to bring in a few EMF shielding materials. Thankfully, my short-term memory and vision were intact this time, and I passed the exam. It is VERY clear that the EMF safety standards set by FCC is grossly outdated and inadequate. I strongly urge FCC to immediately review the current safety standards, and truly reflect the harms of these manmade radiation. They are THOUSANDS of published, peer-reviewed scientific studies from independent scientists (who have NO monetary ties with the industry) that clearly show EMF's biological harm, and you simply cannot continue to ignore the significant impact it has already made to people, animals and environment.

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: BioInitiative Report (2012, with Subsequent Research Updates): Updated Research Summaries https://bioinitiative.org/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 1996 limits rest on outdated thermal assumptions and ignore more than 500 studies showing non-thermal biological effects—oxidative stress, DNA damage, neurological harm, reproductive impacts, and effects on children and wildlife—at levels far below those limits. No adequate safety testing exists for modern pulsed, cumulative, or 5G exposures. Children, long-term residents, pets, and the environment remain unprotected. 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: I have experienced headaches, insomnia, tinnitus, heart rhythm changes, and various other effects from nearby cell towers, or when near cell towers and wireless sources. These symptoms are not isolated; they are consistent with non-thermal biological effects documented in the scientific literature and affect my daily health and well-being. As a certified wildlife rehabilitator, I have also seen and witnessed animals and birds of various types negatively harmed by proximity to these facilities. As a health counselor, I have seen and tried to help people with heart rhythm problems and irregularity, anxiety, stress, insomnia, tinnitus, head and body pain, headaches, migraines, and other common effects associated with these exposures. I do not consent to, and expressly withhold my consent for, any RF radiation, electromagnetic emissions, or wireless frequencies from cell towers, Wi-Fi routers, cell phones, or other wireless telecommunications facilities being directed at or towards me, my person, my family, my home, or my state and country. 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 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. There are many studies showing harm to people, plants and wildlife. You can see the trees reacting to towers within their vicinity. 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 I have been getting horrible migraines for years until I moved out into the desert where I am completely EMF FREE on my property. My laptop is hardwired into my modem. I have NO S.M.A.R.T. phone, NO S.M.A.R.T. devices or appliances of any kind... NO wireless ANYTHING, and finally my migraines have stopped. PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING AND STOP THIS ONSLAUGHT THAT IS HARMING AND ENDANGERING OUR CHILDREN AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE POPULATION! (not to mention the poor animals, reptiles, insects, birds and bees!!!) 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.