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.
Let me start by saying there were scientists that disclosed years ago that 5G shouldn’t even exist. It’s weaponized and dangerous. They are correct in their assessment. On 5G. Poles are disclosures that it affects people and animals. Why is this even a thing? I had to get rid of my 5G mobile router because of the adverse physical effects from it. I have about 10 EMF plugs around my apartment to try to keep it out of life as much as possible.
I believe everyone in the government already knows this, yet now Trump is pushing for 6G which is proven to destroy human cells.
We need protections and we need them now. We need 5G to not be in existence anymore and we certainly absolutely do need 6G. This is a slow death for us all, and in the end someone will need to answer about why all this was allowed.
Can we please address Directed Energy Weapons next? That ties into this as well.
There are many of us civilians currently being attacked right now.
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.
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.
In 2020 after almost losing ny husband to covid. Remdesivir destroyed 2/3rds of his kidneys. He has heart disease also, forcing our hand to sell our home and move into a top floor of 6 story condo March of 2021. On July 3 at a routine eye exam, we were told his results were "concerning", on July 5 he was told he had a large choroidal melanoma tumor behind his left eye. 5 IN A MILLION CANCER!!! THIS WAS NO COINCIDENCE!!. We were never advised or told what hung outside the windows of our bedrooms when we purchased. In 2023 we were told the 4g towers were upgraded to 5g in Nov. What was behind what I thought were electrical boxes on side of building were indeed cell towers. The HOA Board agreed to upgrade...they had no choice as years earlier ONE board member signed a 30 YR iron clad document "locking us in". The residents only thought about the income that kept the fees down. My daughter called me one day as she was driving by and said "Why didn't you tell me there are cell towers on your building?" I just didn't realize. She quickly bought monitors and enlightened me in April 2024. US CELLULAR told the board they didn't want to put the "boxes" back up as it was too much maintenance. Unfortunately, my husbands head was 8 feet from the other side of the wall where those 4G/5G towers were literally DRILLED into the brick building. I started asking questions, no one had an answer..why was this allowed? We bought 3 different RF monitors online, the numbers were horrific..like in the 300-400's.. the monitors would scream beeping...normal and safe was in the 20's! I laid monitors on my husband's pillow...it was 180! When I stood in front of the wall where the tower was on the other side..450! I scoured the internet for information. I called different companies across the country asking if I could hire a professional. I called the FCC, i begged someone to hear me. I sent a text to US CELLULAR TOWER, i got a call one week later. It was Mike Deinhart the VP of US cellular towers. He asked me to tell him what I was concerned about. I thought finally, someone is listening. I told him everything, i sent him videos. He of course said online monitors were not reliable and their RF meters are very accurate. I said..All I'm asking is please have your guys come indide and reassure me that my space was safe". His reply was "Well we dont measure it inside, all we check is to make sure people on ground within distance is within guidelines" But he said I will talk to my team and of course I need to take this to legal" .I should have known at that moment, it was dead. He PROMISED to stay in touch, call him or email him any time. Well, you guessed it...I bugged him two more times, i got one obligatory phone call that USCell was selling and he would probably not be in that job etc etc but he would try to find a T MOBILE person to take on my case. He's still there, nothing done. I stopped the actual tower workers one day, i said Why cant you come in and test? They said, "Our bosses boss told us if we spoke to you we lose our job". My God.!! I cant fight this battle, legally, physically or emotionally.
I spent 3 months doing NOTHING but caring for my husband who passed out EVERY DAY he got out of bed, never realizing his bedroom space was literally killing him.
Summer of 2026, I had a new neighbor, a retired electrical engineer who heard my plight, he lived on 4th floor. He and another retired engineer research our condo, bought very expensive monitors on their own, they tested and recorded readings. They were horrified. I had moved my husband out of that room after the cancer but I was sleeping in that room. We researched the RF paint, last summer we painted the room. It did bring down readings but the damage was done. We sold the condo but I felt I had at least made it as safe as I could. Someone HAS TO do something!! I literally could open a window and touch the bottom of the tower. These companies don't give a damn about human lives, we were living in a literal microwave. Companies who test told me.. you have to move there is no safe place in that condo. I appreciate that RFK JR is bringing this fight the attention it needs.
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.
The SAR (syndrome of acute radiation) caused by microwave radiation from telecommunication antennas, mobile phones, routers, computers, etc…, is the reason so many of us are sick, debilitated, confused, with memory loss, brain tumors, cardiac arrests, skin conditions, tinnitus, flu like symptoms, ADHD, Parkinson’s, dementia, to name a few.
There exists a technology which grounds the microwave radiation, so it is not harmful to living beings and nature. Governments should start using this technology to help the population get better health.
I personally am a hypersensitive person, affected by exposure to the wireless radiation emitted from antennas, mobile phones, computers, and routers, for example. My symptoms manifest as headaches, fogginess, tiredness, tingling in the face (specially the chin area), upset stomach, and eye strain.
I’m very proud of Bobby Kennedy’s work in the Health Department. I hope he and his team keep digging for answers about the dangers of exposing humans and animals to microwave wireless radiation. I’m specially concerned for the children, as their skull’s thickness is less than an adults, thus the wireless radiation penetrates easily.
The military operation of raising towers with antennas all over the world, needs to stop. Humanity is at risk. Children are at risk. Nature is at risk. Species are at risk. We are all at risk!
We know better, we can do better! Let’s tackle the pink elephant in the room.
If we do, Bobby Kennedy’s name will go down in history, for saving humanity from its finality.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
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.