All comment threads

To begin, let me say that have never written down dates or took notes on my symptoms. Having said that, all I can do is guesstimate time frames and provide you with the symptoms I was experiencing and the event that actually made me realize it WAS cell tower and EMF exposure. I started to sense that I was reacting to EMF’s a couple of years ago. I couldn’t put my finger on it, and it’s difficult to explain the “feeling” I experienced, other than to say it felt like a “buzzing” sensation in my head and chest. I had nothing to compare it to - but it was a feeling I’d never felt before. We lived in Florida at the time, but would experience the same feelings while visiting our daughter in Michigan. It wasn’t until about a year and a half ago, while still living in Florida, that I was 100% able to associate the feeling/reaction with EMF’s and cell tower energy. Just about the time I was going to approach my doctor with my symptoms, a very intense reaction occurred after purchasing a 5G internet box from Verizon. I came home, installed it and immediately noticed the same, only more severe, “buzzing” reaction that I’d been noticing prior to that day. It was so intense that I had to leave the house and walk a good distance away before the feeling lessened. As I began to walk back into the house, the sensation returned. It was overwhelming! The only connection I could make was the new internet box - so I quickly went over and unplugged it from the wall. The buzzing subsided greatly - although was still there to a small degree. I got on the phone with Verizon and was told by the representative, after looking up my address, that there WAS NO CELL TOWER NEARBY which is why I was probably feeling that; the box was struggling to put out it’s feelers for a cell tower. She told me that the salesman should have never sold me the box without checking my location first. I took it back to the store, and in front of other customers and the clerk, I explained what had happened. It was a horrible experience. I was angry. But, on the other hand, it was also helpful; it allowed me to make the connection to my personal sensitivity to cell towers and EMF’s. Not all people experience this. But, for those of us that do, it’s horrible and unsettling. We need to address this negative exposure before we move ahead to 6G, 7G, and up. This is real and it’s dangerous to overall health.

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices. I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure. Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects. I ask HHS to: •Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. •Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

I am writing to underline the dangers that lurk behind all types of electromagnetic fields. Today we are living in a soup of radiation that is invisible, but potentially harmful. I cannot quote any studies to provide evidence, but I do know that many have been carried out. I myself am proof of the harmful effect that EMF´s can have as I am very sensitive to the radiation of Smart water meters, Wifi signals, bluetooth, cell towers, etc... After suffering from headaches and lack of sleep, I moved out to the country away from cell towers, the WIFI of neighbors and many other sources of 24/7 radiation. My health has greatly improved. I would beg you to study the literature and case studies of sensitive people like me who, like the canaries in a mine, are warning us to pay attention, and do something before everyone´s health is undermined. I thank you for your attention to this important matter, Mary Beth Hitt

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices. I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure. Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects. I ask HHS to: •Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. •Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices. I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure. Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects. I ask HHS to: •Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. •Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

Telecommunication systems may be weaponised and hacked to attack targets. Constant monitoring of these systems and all other technologies to ensure that if in the case they are weaponised there are protocols to protect the target, mitigate risks and stop the attack. There are expert testimonies that testify that telecommunications systems are covert military-grade weapons in civilian jurisdiction domain. Allegedly, conflict of interest exists if the technologies around us are weaponised and the industry profiting from the weaponisation profits them. For example, if the weaponisation of technology can attack a target victim with radiation warfare and cognitive warfare to artificially induce what looks like a psychotic mental crisis in an otherwise healthy person and the victim is taken to a mental health clinic and given a misdiagnosis of psychosis put on lifelong black-box warning antipsychotic drugs whose “side effects” are death, suicide, homicidal thoughts, infertility and more than 30 other extra seriously harmful side effects no one really wants to suffer from. So the ones that profit from the initial attack is the attacker for whatever motive they attack the victim, the psychiatrists, and for the rest of the victim’s life the pharmaceutical industry that now has one more recurring customer providing income for the remaining of the victim’s life, if the victim manages to survive the dangerous side effects of the drugs prescribed. The Epstein files attest that these attacks have been used to silence whistleblowers. One prime example is Karen Mulder. The same sabotage that was done to Karen Mulder was done to me in Colombia. I have been attacked by these weapons also in France, Colombia, Spain, Italy and to less degree in Switzerland. If it can attack one victim it can also attack the population at large artificially creating what Dr. Robert Malone refers to as Mass Formation Psychosis, a term he informed about during the COVID-19 Pandemic. There are many sharing their testimonies on social media that civilians are being attacked by electronic warfare. Please look into the bigger picture of why this is happening and how to prevent more harm, acknowledgement of the legitimate victims, and justice and honourable lawful justice remedies to all the legitimate victims of these crimes. #TargetedIndividuals #FrequencyWarfare #CognitiveWarfare #RadiationWarfare #NoTouchWeapons #VoiceToSkull #V2K #VoiceOfGod #AsymmetricalWarfare #MassFormationPsychosis #NonconsensualExperiments #SocialEngineeringExperiments #ManchurianCandidates #GangStalking #HavanaSyndrome #DEBE #AHI #MindControl #MKULTRA #AcousticHeterodyning #Coercion #Torture #Extortion #RemoteRape #ForcedOrgasm #MindRape #RemoteAttacksOnTheHeart #PsychologicalWarfare #PsyOps #ArtificialTinnitus #ForcedWakingVisions #Sabotage #Pillaging #Plundering #VividControlledDreamBroadcasting #RemoteAttacksOnFertility #RemoteAttacksOnTheHead #SlowKill #RadiationPoisoning #SexKittenBetaProgramming #Transhumanism #InternetOfBodies #ImplantableMicrochips #CognitiveLiberty #CognitiveSovereignty #NonNegotiableInalienableRights #UltraVires #VisCoactus #Zersetung #DARVO #Persecution #ForcedMemoryBlanking #InducedChangesInHearing https://x.com/WestwoodParking/status/1584682608935731200/video/1?s=61

Sleep disturbances, heart palpitations or other cardiac symptoms, eye issues,and more health problems, used to be rare or non-existent for me and others in my family until the expansion of wireless technologies and cell tower installations near our homes! Now, the effects of these types of radiation have shown up in many people I know! It's overdue that the truth of being exposed to these types of emissions is dangerous and must be honestly investigated, then, limit our exposure by banning most of it! There are safer ways to make technology much safer for our health and well-being before it causes further damage to our lives! The proof that these technologies and their radiation emissions do harm humans, plants animals and the environments we live in!

Radiofrequency radiation is biologically active, and not harmonious with the biology of plants, animals, birds, bees or humans. Policy-wise, it should be made safer, and safe zones for all kinds of emfs should be available to those who reasonably request a mellower more healing environment in homes in particular. For example, only about 2% of the population requests an analog meter so they can sleep or heal at home, or at night, requesting reasonable accomodation in their most private domain. These monopolies should allow this without contest, for it affects the power companies minutely, yet saves lives. This should not be a controversy. Power companies should consider grounding, isolating and filtering all powerful frequencies, as these have effects on all of life, including yours. Choice should be available in any free nation. Privacy is not a luxury. RF increases mold, inflammation, and diabetes. Beyond the biological effects which are openly studied in the goverments own Naval report (1971, or 1972), emfs bring out inflammatory conditions, and even ghosts! Hope there's a chuckle there. For me, the issue causes ocular migraines, cataract with surgery at a young age, the loss of my occupation, and a profound impact on my potential in all areas of life. It causes anxiety and many symptoms in others. Analog should be a choice, and the 1996 Telecommunications act is a form of Treason, imho. Thank you. We can and must do better, safer tech is possible. Thank you.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. This is an issue that I am deeply passionate about. There is great news for our public voice to be heard as we stand powerless at state and local levels while corporate and federal agendas steamroll over everyday citizens. I have donated money time and resources and stood at county board meetings with hundreds of locals opposing cell towers within feet of our homes only to be voted against or dragged into federal court lawsuits we cannot afford trying to protect our bodies, our families, our property values, and our environment from obvious harm. I have stood shoulder to shoulder with neighbors suffering from cell tower radiation health issues only to be reminded by the teams of lawyers and the elected local board members that we as citizens are legally gagged at any level to discuss health issues as an argument against placement of these towers too close to residential and school properties!! THAT IS JUST WRONG. The federal regulations that cite outdated studies claiming no harmful effects of cellular radiation at detectable levels as a reason to gag citizens rights is just wrong. My personal experience is interesting and quickly dismissed by health care professionals: I have developed tnitus out of no where many years ago. I live primarily in a 5 mile radius of many new and pre existing 5g cell towers (not just antennas). It effects my daily health and nightly sleep. Recently we purchased a property that has NO Cellular signal at all and our Internet and cell function is cabled in.(I want my fiber optic cable I was promised and have paid for for years! Dupped again by corporate agendas.) As soon as I get to the property my tinitus is gone immediately and for the duration of the trip. As soon as I get home I get hit immediately by a random crackeling loud wave of sound. I have been to multiple specialists and final results ...I was told by the specialist that it is all in my head and to look into cognitive behavior therapy. No one can or will listen to my feeling that this is signal related. The recent federal attempts to remove any local input to expanded FCC regulations around tower placement (and satellite launches too!) would fast track the complete loss of the last remaing signal radiation free zones in our planet. It will be too late!! My main local level argument, since I am gagged at a federal level from discussing my delusional health concerns over 5g tower radiation, has been the devistaing consequence on our property values with cell towers too close. For many of us citizens our property value in our homes is all the financial liquitdy we might have in a life time and the new cell tower in view of a home devistates property values and in many instances that house WILL NOT EVER SELL! (I have been personally studying this trend on Zillow properties for years and these costal communities are good clean communities but that cell tower in view and affordable remodeled homes just sit for years Then there are the existing studies of the effects of the signals interfering with insects, precious already threatened polinators, bats and other wild life that rely on communication signal of their own frequencies. Stop destroying our planet for profit and control. Just Stop It!!! Please help us get these issues heard and stop gaging legal committed US citizens at federal state and local levels from having any control of our own property, health, and communities at local levels and beyond. Mother, Business Owner, Property Owner, Citizen

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices. I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure. Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects. I ask HHS to: •Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. •Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.