All comment threads

& 2. an individual 3a. Type of wireless or RF/EMF sources involved (e.g., mobile phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters…)Mobile phones, wi-fi routers, smart meters, cell towers, cordless telephones 3b. Nature, duration, frequency, and approximate timing (e.g., years):22 years 3c. Adverse health effect(s) experienced:Headaches, insomnia, pain in brain, irritability, fatigue, brain fog, concentration, personality/mood, general "happiness" disappears, depression or anxiety like symptoms. 3d. Time from first exposure to first appearance of adverse health effects; and did a change in exposure coincide with the onset of adverse effects:Adverse affects with each exposure to close proximety to cell tower. Then wi-fi, cell phones, cordless phones, computers and routers. Basically anything with radio frequency. The effects are immefiate sometimes. Other times, the effects are cumulative and symptoms increase gradually over time, such as over two hours. 3e. Was medical evaluation or treatment sought? (Optionally:) Was there a diagnosis?I did seek medical treatment with the cell tower exposure, but at the time I did not know it was the cell tower causing severe symptoms. Doctor just "trialed" thyroid medication due to fatigue. However the blood tests did not show thyroid dysfunction. 3f. Were steps taken to reduce or eliminate exposure, and were there subsequent changes in the effects?Yes and symptoms resolved. 3g. Any supporting documentation? This includes Scientific Reports, exposure measurements, or other relevant information:I have Scientic Reports that also support the ill health affects of RF. I have dozens of reports from specialists. Additional Details you would like to share about your experiences of adverse health effects you believe to be associated with exposure to wireless radiation or EMF's:My life has been profoundly negatively affected by radio frequency radiation (RF). I have been disabled by it. I can no longer comfortably stay in hotels, travel, or stay with friends who will not turn off wi-fi or cell phones. B1a. Sources you experience as causing you Adverse Effects:Wi-fi, cell phones/towers, smart meters, anything "smart" or TV's, tv antaennas. I notice combining several devices cause symptoms to be worse. B1b. Sources you can sense, but don't seem to harm you:Dirty electricity (DE) more than RF, but it does harm me the same as RF radiation. However, this is easier to mitigate with a Stetzer filter that brings significant relief. B1c. Sources you can use without sensing or being harmed:Landline phones, all electric devices that use simple electricity and are not "electronics". These include things like mixers, toasters made before "energy efficiency". B1d. Sources that seem to provide benefit (i.e., electrotherapy):Stetzer filters for DE, unplugging devices. An area of investigation is "How poor underground electric power grid lines can affect sensitivity to radio frequency radiation". I was exposed to improperly grounded and under-sized power lines and bad transformers. This increased symptoms to RF. After the power lines and transformers were replaced and grounded, my RF symptoms were dramatically reduced. Not gone, but 80% better!!! LiFE CHANGING!! Bad power lines produce massive RF and/or dirty electricity. B2a. Health conditions you think may contribute to your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless:Insomnia, chronic fatigue, mood disorder, cognitive impairments, brain fog, irritability. B2b. Health conditions you don't necessarily associate with your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless, but might be relevant:ME/CFS, mold exposure, heavy metal levels, viral loads B3. For each subquestion please list up to 5 drugs or therapies or home remedies (if any) B3a. That you recommend, as they helped you tolerate or recover from EMF exposure:Correcting underground (or overhead) utility power lines to be properly sized and properly grounded is IMPERATIVE if this is an issue in your residence. Ensure there are absolutely no voltage in the earth around your home. You cannot depend on the power company to measure this. Hiring contractor specializing in EMF. Use Stetzer filters for DE. Shield wi-fi routers and smart meters. Phone in airplane mode. B3b. That you recommend, but you’re not positive that they help:Hrmonizers. B3c. That helped you but you don’t recommend. (e.g., the benefit did not last long or the side effects were too harmful):Supplements. B3d. Treatments that had no effect:Electro-therapy, ultrasound, electric sauna, anything electrically therapeutic. B3e. Treatments that made your sensitivity worse:65-74 B4. What is your age range?65-74 B5. What year did you become aware of your sensitivity to wireless radiation or electromagnetic fields?2006 B6. What country, state, province, or major city were you living in when you first noticed your sensitivity to wireless or electromagnetic fields?Washington DC, Indiana

Question 2: I am responding as an individual consumer, a mother, and a member of a household where both adults work from home. I am not a scientist or medical professional. My comments are based on my own experience. My husband has submitted a separate response describing his own experience and measurements. Question 3: From 2022 to 2024 we lived about 400 metres from a mobile phone base station that carried 5G. My husband’s meter readings outdoors facing the mast were much higher than at our current home. Our house also had a lot of wireless technology, including Wi-Fi, several smart speakers, and wireless smart lights, switches and sensors. I worked from home, using my mobile phone regularly, with my desk beside our Wi-Fi router for most of the working day. While living there I had two miscarriages. I also developed tinnitus, anxiety, pressure in my head and difficulty sleeping. When we became aware of possible risks, we removed all the wireless devices from the house after both miscarriages, and in late 2024 we moved to a home further from base stations, where we do not use Wi-Fi and indoor readings are very low. My symptoms went away completely after the move. We conceived without difficulty and I have had a successful pregnancy. In late 2025 my symptoms returned. Only afterwards did we notice that a nearby base station had been rebuilt taller, with six new antennas; the operator has since confirmed the site runs 5G. By late 2026 my symptoms had become unbearable. We now sleep inside a shielding canopy over the bed, and we have fitted shielding to our windows. I understand that miscarriage is common and has many causes, and that other things in our lives changed when we moved. I am not claiming that wireless exposure caused my losses or my symptoms, and I know my observations are not blinded. Some research exists on exposure in pregnancy, including mobile phone use and living near base stations. That gap is why I am writing. Question 11: Pregnant women and unborn children should be a priority population in research and exposure guidance. Simple advice, such as keeping routers away from where people sit for long periods and limiting wireless devices in the home, costs nothing and could be given now. Question 16: I would like independent, publicly funded research into reproductive outcomes, including miscarriage and fertility, in relation to everyday combined exposure at home and at work, using measured exposure rather than estimates based on phone use. Question 18: I am concerned about how quickly new wireless technologies are being installed outdoors and inside buildings, including Wi-Fi throughout schools, where children spend most of their day and have no choice about their exposure. Reviews commissioned by the World Health Organization found very little research on long-term exposure and cognition in children, and one Swiss study of adolescents found an association between mobile phone exposure to the head and poorer memory development, which the authors say needs confirming. I recommend that new technologies and frequency bands are independently assessed for health effects before widespread rollout, and that schools follow France’s approach since 2015: no Wi-Fi in spaces for children under three, Wi-Fi switched off in primary schools when not needed for teaching, and parents told before new wireless equipment is installed. All information in this response is from my own experience and is not peer-reviewed research.

Question 2: I am responding as an individual consumer, a mother, and a member of a household where both adults work from home. I am not a scientist or medical professional. My comments are based on my own experience. My husband has submitted a separate response describing his own experience and measurements. Question 3: From 2022 to 2024 we lived about 400 metres from a mobile phone base station that carried 5G. My husband’s meter readings outdoors facing the mast were much higher than at our current home. Our house also had a lot of wireless technology, including Wi-Fi, several smart speakers, and wireless smart lights, switches and sensors. I worked from home, using my mobile phone regularly, with my desk beside our Wi-Fi router for most of the working day. While living there I had two miscarriages. I also developed tinnitus, anxiety, pressure in my head and difficulty sleeping. When we became aware of possible risks, we removed all the wireless devices from the house after both miscarriages, and in late 2024 we moved to a home further from base stations, where we do not use Wi-Fi and indoor readings are very low. My symptoms went away completely after the move. We conceived without difficulty and I have had a successful pregnancy. In late 2025 my symptoms returned. Only afterwards did we notice that a nearby base station had been rebuilt taller, with six new antennas; the operator has since confirmed the site runs 5G. By late 2026 my symptoms had become unbearable. We now sleep inside a shielding canopy over the bed, and we have fitted shielding to our windows. I understand that miscarriage is common and has many causes, and that other things in our lives changed when we moved. I am not claiming that wireless exposure caused my losses or my symptoms, and I know my observations are not blinded. Some research exists on exposure in pregnancy, including mobile phone use and living near base stations. That gap is why I am writing. Question 11: Pregnant women and unborn children should be a priority population in research and exposure guidance. Simple advice, such as keeping routers away from where people sit for long periods and limiting wireless devices in the home, costs nothing and could be given now. Question 16: I would like independent, publicly funded research into reproductive outcomes, including miscarriage and fertility, in relation to everyday combined exposure at home and at work, using measured exposure rather than estimates based on phone use. Question 18: I am concerned about how quickly new wireless technologies are being installed outdoors and inside buildings, including Wi-Fi throughout schools, where children spend most of their day and have no choice about their exposure. Reviews commissioned by the World Health Organization found very little research on long-term exposure and cognition in children, and one Swiss study of adolescents found an association between mobile phone exposure to the head and poorer memory development, which the authors say needs confirming. I recommend that new technologies and frequency bands are independently assessed for health effects before widespread rollout, and that schools follow France’s approach since 2015: no Wi-Fi in spaces for children under three, Wi-Fi switched off in primary schools when not needed for teaching, and parents told before new wireless equipment is installed. All information in this response is from my own experience and is not peer-reviewed research.

Dear Department of Health and Human Services: Thank you for listening to the concerns people have about wireless technology. I began suffering from EMR (electromagnetic radiation) Syndrome about 25 years ago. The chronic symptoms I have struggled with over the years include tinnitus, head and facial pain, head fogginess/dizziness, eye and vision problems, nosebleeds. My doctor and I spent years trying to determine the cause of my symptoms. I saw various specialists including an ENT doctor and at least three different neurologists. I had a CT scan and two brain MRIs. I had no success with any of the prescribed treatments, and none of my health care providers could figure out what was going on. Finally, about 10 years ago, I stopped using a cordless phone and took other steps to reduce my RFR (radiofrequency radiation) exposure. In doing so, I experienced a dramatic reduction in my symptoms. The general public needs to be aware that wireless radiation is harmful to human health. I have lost three jobs in the last nine years because my employers refused to provide a safe working environment. In the most recent incident, a WiFi router was located near my desk and I asked for permission to move the router at least 15 feet away. My boss refused to accommodate my request. When I told her that my doctor had advised me not to sit in such close proximity to the router, she terminated my employment. In the United States, we, the public, are not adequately protected by our safety standards. Thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies, accumulated over decades, report biological effects from exposure to non-thermal, non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (the kind emitted by cell towers, smart meters, WiFi routers, cell phones, Bluetooth devices, etc.). Our safety regulations do not to consider the bioeffects of wireless radiation at non-thermal levels. Nor do they consider the cumulative effects of long-term exposure over a period of years. The regulations consider only short-term exposure from a single source. They fail to consider exposure from multiple simultaneous sources, such as occurs when you, for example, use a cell phone or tablet near a smart meter in a location covered by multiple WiFi networks. One thing we know about wireless radiation is that, among the many effects seen, a very serious one is the deterioration of the genome (genotoxicity).  Such an effect, if seen in a food item under development or in a potential pharmaceutical drug, would immediately completely ban the product from future marketing and sale. The wireless revolution began more than 25 years ago, and the damage done so far is incalculable. The scientific and medical evidence is clear. Our government agencies need to protect the public from wireless harm, and they need to act now. Please take the time to consider the study conducted by James C. Lin titled “Health and safety practices and policies concerning human exposure to RF/microwave radiation.” https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1619781/full

Sivani Saravanamuttu, M.Phil., Ph.D. Independent Researcher and Author; Founder of Project Plain Talk I submit the following comments on the HHS RFI on Electromagnetic Fields, RF Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. My perspective draws on my peer-reviewed 2013 review (Sivani & Sudarsanam, Biology and Medicine) previously filed as Exhibit 19 in FCC ET Docket 13-84, and my book - The Digital Pied Piper Effect (2018) - which treats RF-EMF health questions as a systems problem involving both biological responses and behavioural patterns that increase cumulative exposure, especially in children. Key points (detailed in the attached PDF): - Exposure and behaviour are entangled; studies should measure both and attempt to separate their effects. - Priority needs include real-use dosimetry, longitudinal cohorts from early life and transparent evidence syntheses. - Individual sensitivity (including EHS/IEI-EMF) requires better methods (e.g., proteomics approaches proposed by Leszczynski) rather than relying solely on self-report or short provocation studies. - EHS recognition and prevalence data are concentrated in high-income countries; comparative data from other regions are lacking. - Coordination across FDA, NIH, CDC and related agencies is needed, with attention to non-thermal mechanisms as hypotheses requiring further testing and to practical exposure-reduction options. The full response, with citations and mapping to specific RFI questions, is attached as a PDF.

Triple board certified physician here including in Brain Injury. It's simple. EMF changes biological signaling in a detrimental way, even at levels FAR below thermal effects. It is no less than a neurotoxin that our government has failed to protect us from. Change that. For one of a thousand studies on this topic, see Int J Radiat Biol. 2026;102(4):421-434. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2026.2617592. Neurotoxic effects of 3.5 GHz GSM-like RF exposure on cultured DRG neurons: a mechanistic insight into oxidative and apoptotic pathways.

The radiation from wireless devices and my smart meter makes have migraines and headaches. There are many others who have the same symptoms and it causes anxiety and distress may even potential cause cancer with long term use…please consider the voice of the people being harmed.

Re: Docket No. HHS-OASH-2026-0397; Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure; 91 FR 59792 (September 21, 2026); FR Doc. 2026-19252; regulations.gov Document ID HHS-OASH-2026-0397-0001 Perspective (Question 2): I write as a researcher and as a consumer; I file in my individual capacity, with affiliation for identification only, and my response rests on the methodological literature and on professional experience rather than on new data. I am an epidemiologist (Ph.D., University of Minnesota) and a security engineer who has built RF telemetry and software-defined radio sensing systems through two companies I co-founded. The strongest case for this RFI is its order of operations: asking the research community and the public to identify frameworks, evidence, exposure methods, surveillance gaps, and research priorities before any policy move is the correct sequence, the questions are well structured, and the instruction that respondents name the frameworks they rely on and the basis of their evidence is sound. I take no position on whether RF exposure below current limits causes harm. My position is narrower and prior: that question cannot be answered well until exposure is measured, so the most consequential questions in this notice are the exposure-assessment and surveillance questions. Summary of recommendations: 1. For each exposure framework HHS relies on, state the biological endpoint the limit protects against and the safety factor applied (Question 5). 2. Fund a national measured-exposure program: calibrated personal dosimeters and fixed software-defined radio monitors on a probability-based population panel, recording band-resolved field strength and duty cycle over time with published uncertainty budgets (Questions 7 and 8). 3. Disclose measured field strength at representative use distances, in plain units with stated uncertainty, rather than only a single maximum SAR value (Question 9). 4. Evaluate any new surveillance system against the CDC 2001 attributes before it is built, and give every registry an exposure denominator by linking it to the measured-exposure panel (Question 10). 5. Differentiate exposure assessment for children and for occupational groups because dose, not only field strength, differs (Question 11). 6. Apply symmetric quality criteria to studies finding effects and studies finding none, and prioritize measured-exposure cohorts and replication of the most-cited findings on either side (Questions 12 and 16). 7. Adopt a single federal exposure-measurement data standard and shared repository for FDA, NIH, CDC, and the FCC, coordinated with the FCC's concurrent proceeding (Question 17). The full comment is attached as a PDF. Disclosure: I have no financial interest in any vendor or contract involving this request, and I was not compensated for this comment. I co-founded AirCrumbs, Inc., which develops software-defined radio systems for wireless signal attribution, not exposure measurement, and earlier co-founded MTRX, Inc., which built RF telemetry products; I have no financial interest in any wireless carrier, device manufacturer, or exposure-measurement vendor. Andrew G. Huff, Ph.D., M.S. Risk Factor Research, LLC, Michigan, USA contact@andrewhuff.com

RE: Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure I would like some information.. I am a TI and another one here has V2K thank you.. this has got to stop!! I'll add my signature for support when ever it is helpful thank you much!! This hurts and ruins lives.. has caused this V2K person MUCH TROUBLE thank you

I am getting blasted my head feels like it is about to explode