Physician of 21 years experience, with past 15 years focusing on practical application of metabolic/physiologic principles toward the discovery of root cause drivers of common diseases and various symptoms. Past 10 years have professionally and personally encountered peculiar, and often very severe, symptoms that must be classified as neuroinflammatory in nature. Concern: our modern world now presents an unplanned, and unprecedented, number of physiologic stressors to the human physiology. There are likely subpopulations who are more vulnerable; likely, individuals who are in developmental phases (from embryo through puberty). Wireless radiation has been introduced to into the homes, schools, and communities of nearly 100% of the population. Therefore, studying the effects of RF on the population is going to be fraught with difficulty. But, we only need to look at the cascade of physical and psychological challenges that seem to be overwhelming our youth to acknowledge that we must pause and think. RF presents a very unqiue situation: we have the neurobiological effects of the various types of radiation and its continuous nature (24hrs/d everywhere) and the media that this RF carries (social media, intense unadulterated "communication"). As physicians, we committed to "first, do no harm." Our government, of the people and for the people, must create regulatory structures that allow individuals, parents, and communities to have confidence that the people they are charged with serving can have freedom to "pursue life, libery, and happiness". The extreme and untested introduction of RF technologies into our communities is irresponsible: this is evidenced by the 1996 Telecommunications Act prohibiting regulation base on "environmental effects", which seem to have been interpreted by courts of law to include health concerns. (Section 704(a). Obviously, our modern economy now relies on telecommunications and to a large extend RF use. Our advanced society can certainly find paths that allow the advancement of technology while protecting the humans who use it. From my personal experience, all 4 of my children began suffering peculiar health problems which became critical in 2017. Fortunately, I had the training and education to discover the drivers of their problems which included the discovery that radiofrequency avoidance was crucial to their health. Prior to moving to a more remote location to protect my family during their developmental period, we lived in the Phoenix region. My oldest son was having severe depression and seizure like activity- serious daily suffering. When I discovered the potential role of RF exposure, I purchased RF blocking fabric and made a tent for him to sleep in. As a physician and scientifically minded professional, I was astonished how much improvement this strange step made. Obviously, we cannot expect ordinary families to know to take, any how to take these steps... instead, their children are being diagnosed with autism, depression, bipolar disorder, or any number of neuropsychiatric diagnoses that are driven by environmental toxins and neuroinflammatory insults to their physiology. It appears the HHS easily discovered the connection between acetaminophen and autism... we can certainly make some sense around the ubiquitous RF exposure to our children (and everyone on the planet) and learn how to properly implement and make productive use of these technologies. Alternatively, we allow science to progress at the expense of a healthy body and mind... and suffer the societal and individual consequences unnecessarily. I am not going to provide redundant information (a simple search of PubMed will reveal at least a decade of discussion; "Havana Syndrome" already proves the point in an extreme manner; we likely already know what is going on since "radar sickness" was immediately identified in the 1970s when the navy introduced radar.
The IARC cancer classification seems to have had little or no impact on protecting the public against risks associated with RF exposure. A major hampering factor has been the exposure guidelines by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) based only on the acute and very short-term thermal (heating) effects of RF radiation. These guidelines are used by the majority of countries worldwide. These guidelines were initially published approximately 20 years ago (18) and were updated in 2009(19); however, no changes were made to adapt to the rapidly increasing evidence of the harmful effects of RF and new RF signal characteristics and exposure from new technologies. ICNIRP, with the support of the WHO (10) and the major telecom companies, has made considerable efforts to convince countries worldwide to follow their guidelines. However, with the deployment of the 5th generation of microwave radiation, 5G, even the obsolete ICNIRP guidelines may be exceeded and may become an obstacle for the deployment of 5G (20). Thus, ICNIRP is preparing new guidelines that are briefly commented on below. However, as already published (9,10), the ICNIRP guidelines may be contradictory to a vast number of existing scientific reports demonstrating the harmful effects of RF radiation (21). Furthermore, there may perhaps also be conflicts of interests in terms of ties to the industry.
Recommendation: Carry out research on the health impacts of 5G; revise the FCC’s current maximum RFR exposure levels to take into account the large volume of peer reviewed research indicating non-thermal related adverse health impacts of RFR.
I have attached a checklist the answers all of the questions applicable to an individual. I discuss my reactions to 1. Mobile phones 2. Wi-Fi 3. Bluetooth 4. Smart meters 5. Class D audio amplifiers 6. Cordless phones, with a paragraph for each class of radiation generators.
I then provided narratives for Potential adverse health effects experienced, When potential adverse health effects first appeared relative to when exposure began and whether any changes in exposure coincided with potential adverse health effects, Whether medical evaluation or treatment was sought, including any diagnoses received, Whether steps to reduce or eliminate exposure were taken and, if so, whether any subsequent changes in potential adverse health effects were observed, What existing national and international exposure standards, guidelines, or regulatory frameworks should federal health agencies consider when evaluating the potential adverse health effects of human exposure to RF/EMF?, Is additional research needed to develop, test, and evaluate the effectiveness of procedures and techniques for minimizing exposure to electronic product radiation?, How, if at all, should a classification system account for exposure-related characteristics, including operating frequency, power density, specific absorption rate (SAR), electric- and magnetic-field strength, modulation and pulse characteristics, duty cycle, beamforming, simultaneous exposure to multiple frequencies, duration of exposure, distance from the source, proximity to the body, and cumulative exposure over time?, Should exposure assessment or risk evaluation differ for sensitive populations such as those noted below for an older adult, and Please identify any additional scientific evidence, technical information, data, or recommendations that federal health agencies should consider when evaluating potential adverse health effects associated with RF/EMF radiation exposure.
All of my responses are from the lens of an individual who has suffered from dizziness and other effects to of exposure electronic radiation. And I have been ridiculed and doubted when I have complained of this issue. I respectfully hope you will take my comments as testimony and consider all of my recommendations,
Why our FCC limits are one of the lowest one? Other countries have more protection for their residents than USA, that is not nice to see USA having more tolerance for cancerogenic radiations.
Please find attached my formal public comment submission regarding electromagnetic fields, radiofrequency radiation, and public health (Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397). Thank you for the opportunity to contribute my personal testimony, historical context, and observations to this vital public record.
— Lizette Rodriguez, Author & Medicine Woman
i am attaching comment of what happened to me and my husband when a smart meter was installed at our property. I am not sure the pdf i made was attached