HHS EMFTHE PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM
The people. The questions. The public record.An independent RF Safe project
Forum index › All threadsLatest posting day

THE LATEST SUBMISSIONS

All comment threads

7067 original comments · Newest first

Browse topics
Read full comments below. More load as you scroll.
Posted 2026-10-28#5948 · Permanent link ↗

Calls for action and lists studies on RF and ELF exposure addressing development, reproduction, sleep, ce…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
This has got to STOP!!!2026 A review of potential health risks of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure from mobile phones and base stations in children and pregnant women Chronic paternal Wi-Fi RF-EMR exposure impairs placental efficiency and fetal growth: Association with sex-dependent histone modification patterns in mice Impact of ELF EMF exposure on sleep quality and mental health in a Tunisian power plant: a cross-sectional study Prenatal 3.5 GHz radiofrequency exposure induces renal histological changes and DNA damage in 6-month-old rats Testicular heat-shock protein expression in rats following 3.5 GHz and 24 GHz RF-EMF exposure Radiofrequency fields at 2.45 GHz reprogram mitochondria–lysosome crosstalk and modulate the survival/death of macrophages exposed to LPS and/or the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Environmental and auto-induced RF-EMF adult and children far-field exposure simulations between 450 MHz and 26 GHz Interpretation of epidemiological studies on the relationship between mobile phone use and cancer Disruptive effects of brief radiofrequency noise exposure on migratory bat navigation The Effect of 2.45 GHz Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation on Components of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Gonadal Axis in Male Rats
Posted 2026-10-28#5947 · Permanent link ↗

Advocates protecting biological development and recovery through quantitative risk assessment, mechanisti…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
See attached file(s) Katie Webb, QuantaX Technology HHS-OASH-2026-0397 HHS must act now to reduce unnecessary wireless radiation exposure and protect biological fidelity: the precision with which living systems develop, regulate energy and information, repair damage, and recover. I support and present John Coates's complete comment, included in the attached PDF with my position statement and our illustrated plausible pathways. Low-fidelity biology is the upstream vulnerability HHS must investigate and prevent. Mistimed calcium signals, mitochondrial and redox mismatch, impaired repair, and persistent compensation can reduce the reserve needed for healthy development and later challenges. The S4–Mito–Spin framework connects these processes through specific molecular targets and measurable functions. A standard based on average absorbed energy cannot, by that number alone, characterize biological timing, recovery, or developmental susceptibility. The cancer evidence demands action. NTP and the Ramazzini Institute reported malignant heart schwannomas in male rats. The WHO-commissioned animal review rated evidence for increased glioma and heart schwannoma as high certainty. Melnick and Moskowitz (2026), applying EPA risk-assessment methods, calculated that the public whole-body limit is 15–900 times above modeled exposure levels for one additional cancer per 100,000 people, depending on daily exposure duration, and 8–24 times above their male-reproductive protection estimates. HHS and EPA must derive health-based limits and reduce avoidable exposure while completing that assessment. Put the Yale developmental findings at the center. Aldad and colleagues found hyperactivity, impaired memory, and altered prefrontal-cortex synaptic transmission in mice exposed prenatally to cellular-phone radiation. Yale's senior author described the experiment as showing that prenatal cell-phone exposure caused ADHD-like behavioral problems in mice. Cakir and colleagues subsequently identified delayed radial-glial differentiation and BET-mediated developmental effects in human cortical organoids. A developing child gets one chance at each developmental window. HHS must respond with prenatal protection and a funded developmental research program. Test the full pathway. Measure the S4/channel and CYB5B interfaces, calcium timing, mitochondrial reserve, spin-sensitive chemistry, chromatin responses, and later function together. Kim and colleagues' CYB5B gene-switch study identifies a molecular route from a defined field to rhythmic calcium-dependent gene regulation. The CACNA1C sleep study identifies genotype-dependent response. Use sham, carrier-only, and pulsed exposures at matched SAR with temperature control, then apply molecular blocking, rescue, and timed replay to establish the sequence. Protect future generations now. RF experiments already warrant offspring follow-up: Yan and colleagues reported sex-specific offspring growth and metabolic changes after paternal RF exposure. Separate diet and toxicant experiments demonstrate molecular transmission through sperm RNA and persistence of environmental effects across generations. HHS must directly test RF-associated germline transmission, following maternal gestational lines through F3 and paternal preconception lines through F2, with unexposed descendants and molecular mediation tests. Also measure repeated direct exposure across successive pregnancies. Continued exposure and inherited effects are distinct routes that both require investigation and prevention. My requests are concrete: 1. Publish a federal quantitative RF risk assessment using current cancer and reproductive evidence and established EPA methods. 2. Restore sustained NTP research, independent replication, prospective pregnancy cohorts, and multigenerational studies linked to early fidelity measurements. 3. Reduce unnecessary exposure in pregnancy, childcare, schools, healthcare, and sleeping environments. Fund practical wired and optical alternatives. 4. Require realistic body-contact testing and disclosure of test distance, dose averaging, active radios, and waveform conditions. 5. Reinvigorate Public Law 90-602. Ask Congress to place RF health-protection standards under HHS/EPA and repeal Section 704's health-based siting restriction. 6. Advance the Clean Ether Act through interoperable optical networks, wired-first procurement, independently evaluated pilots, and measured reductions in unnecessary transmissions. Publish a ninety-day work plan, a one-year assessment and research program, named responsible officials, and annual results. The accompanying 5,000-word statement, pathway images, and John Coates's complete comment provide the evidence and implementation requests. Protect biological fidelity before the developmental window closes. Katie Webb QuantaX Technology

Attachments · 14

Original public attachments. Their contents are not included in category reviews.

Posted 2026-10-28#5946 · Permanent link ↗

A commenter with cancer requests intervention, refunds and an end to recurring smart-meter opt-out charge…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
Why is NJ PSE&G charging me $12.00 per month for not having a SmartMeter installed in my home? It emits radiation that causes cancer and I have cancer. My doctors advised against the SmartMeter, even if it emits low radiation. They refuse to stop charging me the $12.00. PSE&G should pay me a refund of all these months of charging me the unnecessary and unauthorized bill of $12.00. I offered to read the meter myself and call or phone it in, but PSE&G advised me on the phone that, "This is not a discussion!". Please intervene on my behalf and stop these $12.00 charges. Please advise. Thank you. Susan Scherman, RN, BA, CSN
Posted 2026-10-28#5945 · Permanent link ↗

Reports nightly shock-like sensations and other symptoms attributed to smart meters, improvement after me…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
To Whom It May Concern, In August 2012, at 3:AM while I was sound asleep, I was suddenly jolted awake by a painful electrical brain shock. The surge started in my head, ran down my spine, and my heart raced with adrenalin. It was such a strong jolt it felt like a punch in the stomach. This was the start of a 6-year-long search for a diagnosis to the brain shocks that became my nightly horror. My symptoms were debilitating. Not only was I having brain shocks, I had nausea, tinnitus, vertigo, neuropathy, and random nosebleeds. During this time, I saw many different specialists, but none could give me an answer. One day, while searching the internet for "brain shocks", I found information that led me to microwave radiation/RF exposure and symptoms. What caught my attention was "nosebleeds". I had not had a nosebleed since I was a child until these brain shocks started. On the internet I was able to find more info and speak with others that were having similar symptoms. The symptoms became more obvious to me that my shocks were from wireless radiation. The worst culprits were the Smart Meters pulsing wireless radiation outside my bedroom window 24/7. The Electric & Gas Company installed them on every home without warning. There were 3 smart meters outside my bedroom wall. My shocks began with the installation of these smart meters... AND... being outside my bedroom wall explains why the shocks came at night while I was sleeping in that room. I bought an RF measuring meter and began removing anything with wireless radiation. I had my Smart Meter exchanged back to the original analog meter. Removing all these things made a big difference in my health but I still had to deal with my neighbor's two Smart Meters located outside my bedroom wall. I tried sleeping in other rooms in my house but still felt electrical "shivers" (like mild shocks). So I decided to build a Faraday Cage to sleep in. A faraday cage is made of fine gauge metal screen on all 6 sides. Microwave radiation cannot pass through the screen. I have been sleeping well in my faraday (for 7 years) with 8 hours of restful sleep every night. I still watch my RF exposure during the day going out in the world where everyone carries a cell phone. BUT thankfully every night my faraday helps restore my nervous system. It doesn't seem fair that I should have to sleep like this. But there is nothing else I can do... and I am thankful for my Faraday Cage. Thank you.
Posted 2026-10-28#5944 · Permanent link ↗

Reports nightly shock-like sensations and other symptoms attributed to smart meters, improvement after me…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
To Whom It May Concern, In August 2012, at 3:AM while I was sound asleep, I was suddenly jolted awake by a painful electrical brain shock. The surge started in my head, ran down my spine, and my heart raced with adrenalin. It was such a strong jolt it felt like a punch in the stomach. This was the start of a 6-year-long search for a diagnosis to the brain shocks that became my nightly horror. My symptoms were debilitating. Not only was I having brain shocks, I had nausea, tinnitus, vertigo, neuropathy, and random nosebleeds. During this time, I saw many different specialists, but none could give me an answer. One day, while searching the internet for "brain shocks", I found information that led me to microwave radiation/RF exposure and symptoms. What caught my attention was "nosebleeds". I had not had a nosebleed since I was a child until these brain shocks started. On the internet I was able to find more info and speak with others that were having similar symptoms. The symptoms became more obvious to me that my shocks were from wireless radiation. The worst culprits were the Smart Meters pulsing wireless radiation outside my bedroom window 24/7. The Electric & Gas Company installed them on every home without warning. There were 3 smart meters outside my bedroom wall. My shocks began with the installation of these smart meters... AND... being outside my bedroom wall explains why the shocks came at night while I was sleeping in that room. I bought an RF measuring meter and began removing anything with wireless radiation. I had my Smart Meter exchanged back to the original analog meter. Removing all these things made a big difference in my health but I still had to deal with my neighbor's two Smart Meters located outside my bedroom wall. I tried sleeping in other rooms in my house but still felt electrical "shivers" (like mild shocks). So I decided to build a Faraday Cage to sleep in. A faraday cage is made of fine gauge metal screen on all 6 sides. Microwave radiation cannot pass through the screen. I have been sleeping well in my faraday (for 7 years) with 8 hours of restful sleep every night. I still watch my RF exposure during the day going out in the world where everyone carries a cell phone. BUT thankfully every night my faraday helps restore my nervous system. It doesn't seem fair that I should have to sleep like this. But there is nothing else I can do... and I am thankful for my Faraday Cage. Thank you.
Posted 2026-10-28#5943 · Permanent link ↗

Reports cancer and Lyme disease in a history of symptoms around electrical and wireless sources, improvem…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
15 years ago, the 'straw that broke the camels back' was a zero turn lawn mower - a little larger than the average. Started getting rashes as I mowed my 12 acres over a 3 week period. Third week i got a rash on my breast - not good. Never sick at 55 years old and as I went to Naturaopathic Doctor found I had cancer, lyme and started noticing everything electric, magnetic and wireless was affecting the cancer and could feel each exposure. Now 15 years later, cancer is gone though I can feel the old spos activate with much exposure at all, I can still feel all electric, magnetic and wireless exposures. Only got better because i built a zero wireless radiation home with ultra low exposure to electric and magnetic radiation... and I stay in it most of the time. I can't live a 'normal' life - though yes, I am thankful this has led me away from being one of the zombies walking around with head down staring at their screens. This is an entire human experience problem - not just about those of us who can't function normally. Can't go on trips with a group of people in cars, can't stay long at family gatherings, have to put up with close family members being mad at me because I need them to turn their phones off in my mostly safe home, have no hope of ever being in a serious relationship again because no one will give up their wireless technology permanently for another person, can't take care of my own yard (magnetic field) and SO much more. I cry as I type this though I haven't cried about it in a long time, just seeing the whole picture of what has happened in 15 years. BUT I have found purpose and fulfillment in helping others because though it took me years to figure out and get somewhat better, others are completely devastated and don't know what to do or where to turn for help - having a high suicide rate. It's only a matter of time before each person will have their 'lifetime radiation cup' filled (all at different times) and will have to go through this... for the rest of their life. Is someone going to stop it? It's long past due! Please help. Everyone is inflamed (many to the point of cancer), can't sleep (their cells are vibrating), brain fog and memory problems, anxiety (directly related to wireless radiation and the overgrowth of lyme which happens with exposure to wireless radiation) and yes, this leads to our high rates of suicide, constant headaches, obesity/insulin issues (some directly related to wireless exposures), ALS, Lou Gerhigs, Multriple Scleroses all directly related.
Posted 2026-10-28#5942 · Permanent link ↗

Supports HHS examination of potential wireless health and environmental effects.

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I am submitting this comment in response to HHS's Request for Information on EMG, RF and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am a concerned member of the Public and I support HHS in taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation.
Posted 2026-10-28#5941 · Permanent link ↗

A healthcare practitioner describes personal and patient symptoms associated with wireless exposure and p…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a Healthcare practitioner and a person who's also been effected by harmful EMFs, RF and WR. In my experience, there are metabolic imbalances that increase one's sensitivity to harmful frequencies but everyone is being harmed, whether they're aware of it or not. Over the decades that I've practiced medicine; first with paper charting and later using electronic medical records and sitting in front of a screen all day; I've noticed a significant shift in my energy levels directly proportional to how long I'm in front of a wireless device. For my patients, I've learned through trial and error that many of their symptoms can be attributed to exposure to various harmful frequencies. This includes but is not limited to; fatigue, headaches, tinnitus, vertigo, insomnia, chronic pain syndromes and cardiovascular symptoms. This is not the underlying cause in all cases but for many people, when we've addressed their exposure properly, it completely eliminated these health concerns. What are we doing to children who are now sitting in front of screens all day and inundated with EMFs and wireless radiation? I support HHS taking an active role in examining the health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Scientific researchers around the world have already done a lot of the work but it continues to be ignored. Federal agencies that are in place to protect the health of Americans, are blatantly ignoring the staggering amount of evidence related to these concerns. Not just for people but for the health of the entire planet. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.
Posted 2026-10-28#5939 · Permanent link ↗

Argues that safety standards should account for head and body size-dependent resonance, presenting AI-ass…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
As a qualified scientist that has done a lot of research in this area, it is crucial that head and body resonance is legitimately used in the determination of the safety standards. The fact that it is not, and that this goes against the obvious science, is very questionable, and I'd say in even stronger terms that it's actually very suspicious. Some research from Grok 4.7 Extra High references this obvious science: "Head size sets the radiofrequency dose. Standards and most of the research behind them use one adult size. That misses what decides how much energy is absorbed, and where in the brain it lands. The head works as an antenna. Size sets the frequency it absorbs most strongly, and which parts of the brain receive that energy. Head size changes greatly from infancy to adulthood, and among people of the same age. The FCC does not measure this. Phones are tested on a single adult head. The environmental limits are tightest where an adult body resonates, and they loosen where the head resonates. The ARRL RF Safety Committee states it directly. "The adult head, for example is resonant around 400 MHz, while a baby's smaller head resonates near 700 MHz. Body size thus determines the frequency at which most RF energy is absorbed." The same guidance puts a grounded adult body near 35 MHz and an insulated adult near 70 MHz, with further resonances near 1 GHz at the body surface. An adult and a baby are not the same antenna. Absorption peaks when head size matches the wavelength in tissue. The field inside the skull then forms a standing wave, so some parts of the brain absorb several times more than others. A head about 10 percent smaller peaks about 10 percent higher in frequency. Circumference is about 35 cm at birth and 54 to 58 cm in adults, a factor of roughly 1.6. Applied to the adult figure, 400 MHz moves to about 640 MHz, beside the ARRL figure of 700 MHz for a baby head. At one age the spread is still several centimeters, about a 10 percent shift, enough to move a peak on or off a band in real use. A small adult and a large child overlap. Age is not a stand-in for head size (Nellhaus, Pediatrics 1968; Rollins, Collins, and Holden, J Pediatr 2010; CDC and WHO growth charts). Calculated models show the same size dependence, and a second peak a uniform head misses. Kritikos and Schwan (IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1972) found internal hot spots in a tissue-like sphere, the frequency of strongest heating set by radius. Joines and Spiegel (IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1974) modeled the skull in layers, skin through brain, at 7 and 10 cm radius, to cover different skull sizes. The layered head has a broad peak near 2.1 GHz. A uniform head of the same size does not. At that peak the field is a standing wave that shifts with frequency. Weil (IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1975) mapped layered heads from 2 to 12.5 cm radius, and the hot spots move with size. The 400 and 700 MHz resonances and this peak near 2 GHz are different. Both move with head size. One adult size sees neither one. The FCC tests a phone at the ear on one shell, the SAM phantom required by IEEE 1528 and FCC KDB 865664. It is the 90th-percentile adult male from the 1988 Army survey (Gordon et al., Natick/TR-89/044, 1989), filled with uniform liquid, which misses the layered peak. It is not a child, a small adult, or the spread at one age, and it cannot compare 400 MHz with 700 MHz. SAM was meant as a cautious overestimate for older handsets (Beard et al., IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat 2006). Later work finds designs where an anatomical head, including a child's, exceeds SAM (Lee and Choi, ETRI Journal 2019). Papers disagree on the size of that gap (Gandhi, Lazzi, and Furse 1996; Christ et al. 2010). One shell measures neither side. Away from the phone, the limits (47 CFR 1.1310; OET Bulletin 65) are strictest from 30 to 300 MHz, at 0.2 mW/cm2. The ARRL states why they loosen above 300 MHz: higher power densities are permitted "based on the concept that the body will not be resonant at those frequencies and will therefore absorb less energy." The head resonances sit in that range. At 700 MHz the limit is f/1500, about 0.47 mW/cm2, more than twice the 30 to 300 MHz limit. A smaller body resonates higher as a whole. The University of Florida newborn model resonates at 240 MHz, with a second peak near 800 MHz, and at resonance the public reference level does not hold the whole-body dose to the basic restriction (Dimbylow, Bolch, and Lee, Phys Med Biol 2010). The same shortfall appears for 1-year and 5-year models (Dimbylow and Bolch 2007). A study or a limit built on one adult head assigns the wrong frequency, and the wrong place in the brain, to children and to many adults. The effect happens where the energy lands, and those peaks move when head size changes. A certification number is the result for one large adult shell. Research and standards need the resonant frequency and the internal pattern across real head sizes, including people of the same age."

10 comments displayed. More load as you scroll.

These are separate official submissions grouped by topic. A comment can appear in more than one board.