All comment threads

On my district wee have 5g in Paris 20 . Îm fear to be electro sensitive be cause Îm chemico sensibilitive. My kid are to place by social service because wee are sensibilise of chemical product

Jag har varit mikrovågs -och metallöverkänslig sedan 2012 och vetskap om EMF sedan 2014. Då pensionerad sjuksköterska.

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 parent and concerned member of the public. Personally, I have been severely affected by EMF's and Wireless Radiation Exposure as well as my son. I've had horrible tinnitus for a few years now and have done almost everything to stop it or at least to try and lessen it. I notice when I shut off my wifi router it's a lot better but there are 5G towers everywhere and now with the smaller extenders on street posts it's horrible. We know how it's unhealthy and there needs more regulation. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. 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.

We have a tower in our small town at the highway dept & across the street from that was a Mexican food restaurant I went in & ordered sat down for on my phone with my back to the tower across the street & immediately felt nauseous I had to run to the bathroom & puked dry heaving. I wield my mouth & walks out the lady held up my order in the bag & I just waved her off trying to get to my car before puking again, the owners of the restaurant said there were quite a few customers who had this happen to them it ruined their business & they had to close down. Ringing in your ears is another sign of EMF bombardment.

I am writing as a parent. I want the issue of EMFs effects on human biology thoroughly studied, and published, so i have confidence on how to protect my children from bodily harm

Comment submitted in response to Docket No. HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure Category: Public Experiences and Reported Potential Health Effects (with relevance also to Categories 2–4) I am submitting this comment as a private individual residing in Naha City, Okinawa, Japan. I am not a scientist or physician. I am submitting this as a firsthand, timestamped case record, because the domestic health and administrative authorities in my own country have declined to investigate it, and because this RFI explicitly requests real-world clustering data of the kind described below. 1. The core factual record On August 4, 2021, I experienced a left-hemisphere hemorrhagic stroke while at my workplace, an office building belonging to a regional electric utility company in a dense commercial and administrative district of central Naha City, Okinawa. Three months earlier, on May 9, 2021, a female coworker of the same age, working in the same building, suffered a stroke and subsequently left her position. I want to state this timeline as precisely as possible: my hemorrhage occurred before I received any COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose. I received my first dose during hospitalization, after the hemorrhage had already occurred. This sequence removes vaccination as a possible cause of the initial event and isolates it as a pre-vaccination, environmentally-exposed case — which I believe gives it particular evidentiary value for isolating non-vaccine environmental factors, including RF/EMF exposure. To summarize the cluster: Same workplace (a single office building) Same calendar year (2021) Same age cohort (both employees born around 1972) Two cerebrovascular events, three months apart (May and August 2021) 2. The infrastructure context The district in which this workplace is located underwent a concentrated buildout of 5G small-cell and telecommunications infrastructure during 2020–2021. A major regional telecommunications/data-center facility was completed in the immediate vicinity in November 2021, and I understand from published construction timelines that test transmissions from that facility likely occurred during the summer and fall of 2021 — a period overlapping with both cerebrovascular events described above. I want to be transparent about the limits of my own documentation: I have not been able to obtain conclusive public records confirming the exact installation date of any small-cell antenna on my own workplace building. I state this as an open, unresolved question — not as a settled fact. 3. Why I am submitting this I am not asking HHS to conclude that RF/EMF exposure caused these two cases. I am submitting this record because: It is precisely the kind of "public experience" and "workplace cluster" data this RFI's Category 1 explicitly invites. It is, to my knowledge, a comparatively rare pre-vaccination case — meaning it may be useful as a data point for isolating environmental (non-vaccine) contributing factors in cerebrovascular events. No domestic institution in Japan — municipal, prefectural, or national — has been willing to examine or record this cluster. I am placing it into this federal public record because I believe a factual account, however small, should exist somewhere on the public record rather than nowhere at all. 4. Specific points relevant to the RFI's other categories Exposure standards (Category 2): I would respectfully urge that any revised framework consider occupational and workplace RF exposure in dense commercial office environments — not only residential or personal-device exposure — as a distinct exposure category worth separate evaluation. Surveillance (Category 3): I would suggest that same-workplace, same-timeframe clustering of cerebrovascular or neurological events be considered a surveillance signal worth systematic, structured tracking — similar to how occupational disease clusters are tracked in other contexts — rather than being dismissed case-by-case as coincidence. Existing evidence (Category 4): Current exposure standards based solely on short-term thermal effects (SAR) do not, to my understanding, address the kind of chronic, non-thermal, clustered occupational exposure described in this case. I thank HHS for opening this process to public and international input, and I hope this record is useful in identifying the research gaps this RFI seeks to find. Respectfully submitted, NOBUO TAIRA Naha City, Okinawa, Japan

I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate the experiences of those being negatively affected by EMFs, RF, and wireless radiation, 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.

Commprehensive Government Study of the Potential Health Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation and Wireless Technologies To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to respectfully request that the appropriate government health and public-safety agencies undertake, support, or commission a comprehensive, independent study of the potential long-term health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) and radiofrequency (RF) radiation from the many wireless technologies now used routinely by the public. Wireless technology has become an integral part of everyday life, and people may be exposed to multiple sources simultaneously and for extended periods. These sources include, but are not limited to: 5G and other cellular networks and infrastructure Cell phones and smartphones Wi-Fi and wireless internet routers Bluetooth devices Wireless earbuds and headphones Wearable wireless devices and smartwatches Wireless home and office equipment Cellular towers and small-cell installations Other consumer and telecommunications RF-emitting devices I recognize that there is substantial scientific research concerning RF and EMF exposure, and that regulatory agencies have established exposure limits based on currently available evidence. However, given the rapid expansion of wireless technologies and the increasing duration and complexity of everyday exposure, I believe it is appropriate for the government to periodically reassess the evidence using current technology, exposure patterns, and epidemiological data. I respectfully request that any such study examine, among other issues: Long-term population health effects of chronic exposure to RF and other relevant portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. Cumulative and combined exposure, including simultaneous exposure from cellular networks, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, phones, wireless earbuds, wearable devices, and other sources. 5G and newer wireless technologies, including whether differences in frequencies, modulation, signal characteristics, network architecture, and exposure patterns warrant additional research. Cell-phone use, including long-term and heavy-use patterns and exposure associated with devices held close to the body or head. Wireless earbuds and Bluetooth devices, particularly because some devices may be used for many hours each day and in close proximity to the head. Children and adolescents, including whether developing bodies or patterns of lifelong exposure warrant separate study. Potential neurological, cognitive, reproductive, developmental, cardiovascular, sleep-related, and other health outcomes, while distinguishing established evidence from preliminary or uncertain findings. Cancer and other long-latency outcomes, including sufficiently long-term epidemiological follow-up to identify effects that may not become apparent for many years. Individual susceptibility and exposure differences, including whether certain populations may experience different effects from comparable environmental exposures. Real-world exposure levels, rather than relying solely on theoretical or laboratory conditions, including measurements of aggregate exposure in homes, schools, workplaces, public transportation, and other environments. Adequacy of existing exposure standards, including whether current limits sufficiently account for chronic, low-level, cumulative, or simultaneous exposure from multiple technologies. Independent scientific review, with appropriate disclosure of funding sources, conflicts of interest, methodologies, raw data where possible, and the full range of relevant peer-reviewed evidence. I also request that the government make the findings of such research readily accessible to the public and clearly distinguish between findings that are well established, findings for which evidence remains mixed or uncertain, and questions requiring further investigation. This request is not based on an assumption that wireless technologies are harmful. Rather, it is a request for continued, independent, evidence-based surveillance and research as exposure patterns and technologies evolve. Given the widespread use of wireless devices and the potentially large population affected by any long-term health consequences, continued monitoring and rigorous research appear to be an important public-health responsibility. I respectfully ask that this request be forwarded to the appropriate federal and/or state agencies, scientific advisory bodies, and public-health authorities for consideration.

I'm prone to hair loss from alopecia areata. About a year ago I realized that excess exposure to microwave radiation led to even more hair loss. The first time I noticed this was in June 2025 when I traveled from the UK |(where I live) to Europe. Partway through the 9 day holiday I noticed that I was losing more hair than usual when I washed it. This continued for some time after the holiday. I can't remember how long but maybe a couple of weeks. I don't know where exactly I was being exposed to the increased radiation but I'm guessing it was likely cumulative - in the airports, then maybe there was more RFR in the two places I stayed than I had at home. Then in September 2025 I travelled from the UK to Holland for a few days. I was driven to Holland, stayed in a relative's house, then got the train home. I don't think the radiation exposure in the house was that bad. With the journey there I would have been in the car for 8 hours with the driver's phone, plus the EMFs from the car, and radiation from masts we passed. But I suspect that the majority of the exposure came from the 8 hour train journey home, being enclosed in train carriages for many hours, much of the time with lots of people around me, all of whom had at least one device, and most of whom were actively using them during the journey. The increased hair loss from this trip lasted for a few weeks afterwards. Subsequently I reduced my exposure to RFR as much as possible. I already had had wired internet for a number of years. But unbeknownst to me the router (not positioned in a place where I spent a lot of time luckily) had been emitting RFR for an unspecified period of time, as it turned out that every time there was a problem with the router (which happened occasionally) it would revert to factory settings, which meant that it was then emitting RFR into the area around it. This could have been going on months or years I just don't know. So I corrected this, and for extra protection put the router in a faraday bag. I also significantly reduced my mobile phone use. And after a month or two, for the first time in a few years, I began to get some regrowth. This then stalled because other factors came into play which I'm still trying to get to the bottom of. For instance, I'm trying to ascertain whether 'dirty electricity' from home appliances, being in a car etc, has a negative effect on my hair or not. Aside from genetics, the contributory factors to the alopecia seem to be multifactorial, and may also include mould issues, the fact I have Hashimoto's, and the state of my digestion. But excess RFR exposure is certainly one significant factor.

Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to share my personal experience with radiofrequency exposure from Wi-Fi and 4G/5G transmitters in my surroundings. I live in Norway, and I am concerned about the increasing level of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation to which people are exposed. I am also concerned that safety limits and assessments may rely heavily on information and research connected to the telecommunications industry itself. I own and operate a company in Norway. We have several computers and a Wi-Fi system at our premises, and the company has been operating for more than ten years. During the first few years, we used desktop computers connected to the internet exclusively through Wi-Fi. In 2017, I received a new desktop computer, which was positioned close to my right foot. Shortly afterwards, I began noticing an unusual sensation along the right side of my body. It felt like a persistent tingling, irritation or discomfort that started in my lower right leg and extended upwards to slightly above my right hip. This continued for several months—possibly four or five months. I consulted a chiropractor because I thought the symptoms might be caused by a trapped nerve or a similar problem, but the treatment did not help. Some time later, we installed a wired internet connection at the premises, significantly reducing our reliance on Wi-Fi. Within approximately one week of installing the wired network, the tingling and irritation on the right side of my body disappeared. To test whether the change might be connected to the Wi-Fi, we disconnected the wired network approximately two weeks later and returned to using Wi-Fi. After a few days, the tingling sensation returned. It was not painful, but it felt like an irritation deep inside the muscles, similar to the sensation of a compressed or irritated nerve. Since that experiment, we have used only a wired internet connection at the company, and I have not experienced those symptoms again. I still use a mobile phone and have Wi-Fi in my home. I am not frightened or distressed by wireless technology in my daily life. However, I am concerned that the telecommunications industry may have too much influence over the standards used to determine which exposure levels are considered safe. Based on the timing of my symptoms, their disappearance after switching to a wired connection, and their return when we temporarily resumed using Wi-Fi, I am convinced that radiofrequency exposure from the Wi-Fi equipment caused my body to react. I have also noticed that vegetation surrounding some 4G and 5G towers in Norway appears to show poorer growth when trees are located very close to the transmitters. I cannot establish the cause based on observation alone, but it adds to my concern that prolonged exposure at close range may have biological effects. When the industry presents this technology as entirely harmless, without what I consider sufficient independent long-term research, I become sceptical. I believe experiences such as mine deserve to be documented and investigated through genuinely independent scientific research. I hope that health authorities will continue to examine the possible biological effects of long-term radiofrequency exposure and ensure that public safety standards are based on precaution, transparency and research that is independent of the telecommunications industry. Sincerely, Geir Loseth Norway