Heart symptoms & implanted devices

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a comment. I absolutely oppose the 2-way wireless radiation emitting smart meters and digital meters that have been forced on Americans’ homes, including mine. Additionally I am very concerned about increasing levels of other sources of electromagnetic radiation and how exposure will affect all Americans, especially my family, as well as the enviroment. Over 1,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies have demonstrated serious adverse health effects from the wireless radiation coming from our cell phones, cell towers, and "Smart" meters radiating our homes 24/7. This includes DNA damage, infertility and reproductive damage, cardiac effects and arrest, neurological conditions (anxiety, depression, Alzheimers), immune system dysfunction, and cancer. Environmental Health Trust provides a list of scientific evidence on this webpage that I am including with my submission. https://ehtrust.org/send-science-to-the-fcc-govt-is-asking-for-evidence-you-can-help-now/ The FCC was sued in 2021 for failing to update their safety guidelines for human exposure limits that were established in 1996 when we were using 2G wireless technologies, not the 4G and 5G we have today. The lawsuit was successful, but now over 5 years later the FCC still has not responded to the court and is refusing to regulate the Telecoms. The reality is NO ONE is measuring our cumulative daily human exposure of EMF “electrosmog” coming from all of our current sources of wireless radiation including 4G/5G “mega” towers, 5G small cells, and the EMF pulsing Smart meters attached to our homes. https://ehtrust.org/in-historic-decision-federal-court-finds-fcc-failed-to-explain-why-it-ignored-scientific-evidence-showing-harm-from-wireless-radiation/ Because I am aware of the health risks, I have tried my best to create a safe healthy environment in my home. We do not have WIFI in our home and haven't for years. Instead we use hard-wired internet. We kindly ask anyone entering our home to please turn off their Cellular Data, Bluetooth, and WIFI on their phones and tablets as my husband and I do the same when we are in our home. Rarely do we need to use the internet on our phones but if we do, we do it quickly and away from our son and then once we are done, we make sure to turn it back off, immediately. We have asked our neighbors to apply faraday cages on their utility meters and they gladly obliged. We take all these measures, and I could go on listing more, because we are aware of the dangers. We do the best we can, to control what we can, knowing once we leave our house, it's a battle zone of cell towers and cell phones. I ask that HHS do everything in its power to better protect Americans from increasing sources of “electrosmog.”

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 healthcare professional, advocate, concerned member of the public, and citizen suffering from EMF exposure. I live in an apartment building and directly under my bedroom is the boiler room housing 60 smart meters for all the apartments and for the common areas of the building. ConEdison continually monitors the smart meters and wakes me up numerous times every night. The EMfF energy causes me to not be able to experience deep restorative sleep; I experience blood pressure, palpitations and sweating during the exposure. I recently retired from working as a Perdiem pharmacist because appropriate sleep is needed to be able to concentrate, dispense and verify prescriptions. HHS should require the energy companies to limit smart meters monitoring to daytime hours between 8am and 8pm. 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. I would like to see prescription prescribing data comparing blood pressure med prescribing rates and insomnia medication prescribing rates during 2010 to 2019 before smart meters were installed and 2019 to 2027 after widespread smart meter usage. Guaranteed people are being diagnosed with blood pressure and insomnia that is being triggered by smart meter monitoring at night. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

Dear Department of Health and Human Services Officials, I am writing as the sister of a nurse whose health and life have been profoundly affected by exposure to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMF) and radiofrequency radiation (RFR). I have seen the toll these challenges have taken on her and her family. I urge you to take seriously the experiences of people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity and investigate the potential health effects of our increasingly wireless environment. My sister is an RN, BSN, with 19 years of experience in ICU, case management, and integrative wellness. She began to experience health issues after Wi-Fi was introduced in her ICU workplace and nurses were required to wear body-mounted wireless communication devices throughout their shifts. Wireless exposures also increased in her neighborhood around the same time. She began experiencing headaches, burning and ringing ears, head pressure, and a wired/shaky sensation. Her previously mild, intermittent supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) worsened dramatically, and she developed non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT). She subsequently developed mast cell activation syndrome. A day spent at a remote state park without cellular service or Wi-Fi brought striking relief from her symptoms. She repeatedly compared how she felt at the park, at work, and at home, and used an RF meter to assess environmental exposures. Sure enough, her symptoms and heart rhythm disturbances were associated with her increased exposure at work and in her neighborhood. Ultimately, she had to leave her in-hospital nursing career to protect her health. As her sister, it has been deeply troubling to see someone with so much medical experience, compassion, and dedication forced to make such life-altering decisions. She and her family made enormous financial sacrifices to find a place where she felt better. They purchased land and downsized to a small, older home near the state park, where they could reduce exposures and obtain an electric utility arrangement permitting smart-meter opt-out. Even with these sacrifices, finding a suitable environment was difficult and expensive. Many Americans simply cannot afford to leave their jobs, relocate, or purchase lower-exposure homes. No one should have to choose between earning a living and protecting their health, or between access to essential services and the ability to reduce exposures they believe are making them ill. Families should not bear the entire financial and personal burden of finding solutions to potential environmental health problems. I urge HHS and lawmakers to take the following actions: Investigate potential health effects. Support rigorous, independent research into non-thermal effects of RFR and extremely low-frequency electric and magnetic fields, including possible cardiac, neurological, oxidative stress, mast-cell-related, and metabolic effects such as insulin resistance. Reassess exposure standards. Review current safety limits in light of the full scientific literature, including research on biological effects beyond tissue heating, cumulative exposures, long-term effects, and vulnerable populations. Protect people in essential environments. Evaluate wireless exposures in hospitals, schools, workplaces, and residential neighborhoods. Provide lower-exposure spaces and practical alternatives for people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity, without requiring them to sacrifice employment, education, or medical care. Protect informed choice. Support reasonable smart-meter opt-out provisions and alternatives to unnecessary wireless technologies, where technically feasible, without undue financial penalties or loss of essential services. Listen to researchers and affected individuals. Invite independent scientists, medical professionals, and people reporting symptoms to testify. Review the BioInitiative Report (https://bioinitiative.org/) and consider inviting its contributing researchers and Andrew Marino, MD, PhD, to discuss research concerning RFR and electric and magnetic fields. I am also concerned about the implications for children and future generations. Wireless technology is increasingly present in schools, hospitals, homes, and public spaces. We need responsible investigation and evidence-based safeguards rather than assuming existing standards address every possible risk. I recognize that my sister's experience alone cannot establish scientific causation. However, her experience deserves serious consideration alongside the broader scientific literature. People reporting these symptoms deserve compassion, appropriate medical evaluation, research, and environments safe for their health. Please use your authority to ensure HHS thoroughly investigates these concerns, supports independent research, and develops evidence-based policies that protect public health without placing the burden of exposure avoidance solely on affected individuals and their families. Thank you

Je soumets ce commentaire en réponse à la demande d'informations du HHS sur les champs électromagnétiques (CEM), les rayonnements radiofréquences (RF) et l'exposition aux rayonnements sans fil ainsi que l’envoi d’ondes par les armes à énergies dirigées. Je réponds du point de vue de la Présidente de l’Association du Collectif des Personnes Ciblées. Tous les membres actifs de l’Association du Collectif des Personnes Ciblées sont des« personnes ciblées » depuis plusieurs années par le biais d’armes à énergies dirigées utilisés sur les civils. Ces armes ont des lanceurs d’ondes comme les frigos, les wifis, les luminaires, la télé, le portable le plus douloureux pour le cerveau. Elles subissent le « Syndrome de la Havane »  avec comme symptômes pour chacun d’entre nous : Secousses dans les différents membres du corps, sensations de brûlures diffuses ou localisées intenses, Sensations d’engourdissements et de pression dans la tête, Maux et tintements d’oreilles ou acouphènes, Écoute de bruits étranges ou de voix que personne d’autre ne peut entendre Rêves étranges ou cauchemars, Privation de sommeil, sommeil perturbé, réveils nocturnes Nausées, Migraines, Épuisement, Dysfonctionnement cardiaque, Apnées du sommeil et asphyxie, Douleurs intenses et diffuses, Vieillissement prématuré et de la peau, Perte de mémoire et de concentration… En France, le Pays est condamné par la dictature nous ne pouvons faire sortir cette information primordiale car il nous est interdit d’en parler sous peine de menaces de mort, de meurtre provoqué et d’enfermements abusifs, aussi nous aimerions que Mr Kennedy affirme haut et fort que cela existe et fasse en sorte que tout le peuple Français soit au courant pour le bien de l’Humanité. Nous soutenons l'implication active du Département de la Santé et des Services sociaux (HHS) dans l'examen des effets potentiels des rayonnements sans fil sur la santé et l'environnement. Les questions relatives à la santé humaine devraient être traitées par les agences fédérales possédant l'expertise appropriée en médecine, biologie, épidémiologie et santé publique, et les témoignages des personnes et des familles qui se disent affectées devraient être pris en compte au même titre que les données scientifiques. J’exhorte le HHS à évaluer soigneusement ces expériences et les données scientifiques, à identifier les lacunes de la recherche actuelle, à accorder une attention particulière aux enfants et aux autres populations potentiellement vulnérables, et à établir des priorités de recherche fédérales appropriées concernant les rayonnements sans fil et la santé publique. Merci de donner aux individus et aux familles l'occasion de se faire entendre. Voici notre adresse mail : LaNouvelleResistanceFrancaise@protonmail.com

I am Sarah Starr. My work includes space-weather forecasting, astrology, consciousness education, and exploration of non-human intelligence. I urge HHS to include space weather in its investigation of electromagnetic fields, radiofrequency radiation, wireless exposure, and human health. We cannot fully understand the electromagnetic environment people encounter by studying phones, towers, and electronics alone. Natural conditions belong in that investigation too. I want HHS to connect observations of solar activity and geomagnetic disturbances with exposure measurements, health research, and public-health preparedness. Space weather changes Earth's electromagnetic environment. Solar storms affect the magnetosphere and ionosphere, altering currents, fields, and the propagation of radio signals. They can disrupt communications, navigation, satellites, and power systems. These hazards affect public health, emergency response, and national security. Our reliance on technology makes understanding those consequences essential. Wireless infrastructure, personal devices, and high-power transmitters such as HAARP should receive independent exposure assessment. Each source has its own operating characteristics. I ask HHS to investigate the natural conditions surrounding these systems and the people who use them. Measure what happens during both quiet periods and space-weather events, rather than assuming that one set of conditions represents every situation. I am interested in changes in Earth's magnetic field and the wider reach of auroral displays during strong storms. Regional magnetic weakening, strengthening elsewhere, and unusually southern auroras are reasons to examine local conditions. They should prompt coordinated measurements of fields, particles, and radiation, rather than a single assumption about exposure everywhere. Natural radiation also deserves attention. Solar energetic particles, cosmic radiation, and gamma rays from atmospheric events involve different sources and exposure pathways. Ground-level particle detections and observed thunderstorm gamma-ray bursts show why research should capture brief events as well as averages. Establishing their relevance to people requires measuring location, altitude, shielding, energy, and duration. These distinctions make an investigation more useful: they identify the hazard and the protection it requires. My request is to study these conditions together without treating every form of radiation as interchangeable. A disrupted radio signal is different from an increased dose to a person. A change in the magnetic field is different from gamma exposure. We need measurements that establish those connections where they exist and distinguish them where they do not. The health questions deserve sustained attention. Published research has reported associations between geomagnetic activity and cardiovascular measures or mortality. I want independent studies to determine whether these findings hold across populations, what mechanisms explain them, and whether simultaneous wireless exposure changes the outcomes. Include sleep, cognition, mood, and prospectively reported symptoms alongside measurements. My interests also include consciousness and changes in human experience. I want these concerns approached respectfully and investigated through defined neural, cognitive, and subjective outcomes. Laboratory findings of brain responses to magnetic-field changes offer specific questions for replication. They should lead to careful investigation of human sensitivity, rather than assumptions about what every reported experience means. Wildlife and ecosystems belong in this discussion. Research on magnetic navigation and electromagnetic interference gives us reasons to examine orientation, migration, and other functions organisms depend on. Study realistic exposures and determine whether observed changes affect survival, reproduction, or ecological health. I ask HHS to coordinate with NOAA, NASA, USGS, FAA, FCC, and me. Support studies across multiple locations that pair environmental records and personal RF monitoring with standardized health measures. Account for weather, pollution, sleep, medications, and expectations. Include appropriate studies of children, pregnant people, older adults, implant users, and exposed workers. Publish methods, uncertainty, and null findings as openly as positive results. Preparedness must accompany research. Evaluate how power failures, communications disruption, and interrupted medical care affect communities, and people who depend on electricity for treatment. These indirect pathways deserve attention alongside direct biological questions. My attached paper explains the evidence I reviewed and proposes a coordinated research program. I ask HHS to give space weather an explicit, sustained place in its research agenda and to examine the connections that separate monitoring programs can miss. Sarah Starr

HHS Public Comment — Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Questions 2, 3, 5–13, 15–18 I submit this comment as an individual with approximately 14 years of lived experience with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS/EMR-S) and as a licensed clinical social worker. Q2–3: Personal Experience and Health Effects For approximately 14 years, I have experienced symptoms associated with electromagnetic exposure, including sleep disruption and inability to sleep, burning skin, skin redness and mottling, intense pressure around my head as though it were in a vice, squeezing sensations in my chest, heartbeats that feel erratic, and difficulty concentrating. These experiences have affected my sleep, ability to use my home, work, finances, independence, and daily life. At times, I have felt driven to sleep in my car rather than remain in an environment where I was experiencing symptoms. These are significant effects on my life, not abstract concerns. HHS should take reports of EHS seriously, investigate symptoms under real-world exposure conditions, and provide practical assistance to affected individuals. Q5–8, 12–13, 15–16: Standards, Exposure, and Research Independently review whether current exposure standards adequately address long-term and cumulative exposure, real-world conditions, and potentially susceptible individuals. Compliance with existing limits should not automatically end investigation of reported symptoms. Research should evaluate multiple simultaneous sources, exposure patterns over time, and conditions in occupied homes and everyday environments. Include the National Toxicology Program's radiofrequency studies and the Ramazzini Institute study in a transparent evaluation of the evidence. Identify research gaps and prioritize independent research into EHS and practical exposure-reduction options. Q9–11(g): Disclosure, Surveillance, and EHS Residents deserve understandable information about wireless sources in or near their homes, including their characteristics and operating patterns. HHS should support privacy-protective reporting of symptoms and exposure circumstances and explicitly consider people with EHS among populations who may uniquely experience adverse effects. URGENT: SMART METERS AND INVOLUNTARY EXPOSURE Communication-enabled utility meters deserve specific, urgent attention. They may be installed on or immediately adjacent to homes, leaving residents little control over exposure. Because utilities are essential services, people may face fees, barriers, or penalties for requesting an alternative. For people with EHS, this can mean having a wireless transmitter at home without a meaningful ability to opt out. HHS should investigate meter transmission characteristics, real-world indoor exposure, placement near occupied rooms, and cumulative exposure alongside other wireless sources. Work with utility regulators to promote transparent disclosure, feasible non-wireless alternatives, fair accommodations, and protection against unreasonable fees or loss of essential service. This lack of choice requires action now, not research alone. EVERYDAY PRODUCTS AND THE RISK OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION The problem extends beyond utility meters. Cars, appliances, and an increasing range of everyday products incorporate microprocessors, electronic circuitry, and wireless technologies that people with EHS may have difficulty tolerating. As wireless technology becomes embedded in more necessities, finding usable products can become increasingly difficult and expensive. People may face the frightening prospect of being progressively pushed out of ordinary social life because transportation, household equipment, housing, and other necessities become inaccessible. What are people with EHS supposed to do as everyday life becomes harder to access? HHS should investigate these barriers and promote transparent product information, practical accommodations, and affordable alternatives. People should not be expected to withdraw from society or bear the entire burden of finding workable options themselves. Q14, Q17–18: Environmental Effects, Coordination, and Accountability Coordinate among FDA, NIH, CDC, and relevant regulators. Examine environmental effects and establish clear responsibility for follow-up. Research and standard-setting must be transparent and independent, with safeguards against conflicts of interest, regulatory capture, and undue industry influence. After approximately 14 years of living with these effects, I am asking for more than acknowledgment that further research is needed. People experiencing EHS need practical help now, alongside independent research and meaningful protections. No one should have to choose between essential services and a reasonable opportunity to reduce unwanted exposure. Please treat EHS as an urgent public-health, accessibility, accommodation, and consumer-protection issue.

HHS Public Comment — Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Questions 2, 3, 5–13, 15–18 I submit this comment as an individual with approximately 14 years of lived experience with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS/EMR-S) and as a licensed clinical social worker. Q2–3: Personal Experience and Health Effects For approximately 14 years, I have experienced symptoms associated with electromagnetic exposure, including sleep disruption and inability to sleep, burning skin, skin redness and mottling, intense pressure around my head as though it were in a vice, squeezing sensations in my chest, heartbeats that feel erratic, and difficulty concentrating. These experiences have affected my sleep, ability to use my home, work, finances, independence, and daily life. At times, I have felt driven to sleep in my car rather than remain in an environment where I was experiencing symptoms. These are significant effects on my life, not abstract concerns. HHS should take reports of EHS seriously, investigate symptoms under real-world exposure conditions, and provide practical assistance to affected individuals. Q5–8, 12–13, 15–16: Standards, Exposure, and Research Independently review whether current exposure standards adequately address long-term and cumulative exposure, real-world conditions, and potentially susceptible individuals. Compliance with existing limits should not automatically end investigation of reported symptoms. Research should evaluate multiple simultaneous sources, exposure patterns over time, and conditions in occupied homes and everyday environments. Include the National Toxicology Program's radiofrequency studies and the Ramazzini Institute study in a transparent evaluation of the evidence. Identify research gaps and prioritize independent research into EHS and practical exposure-reduction options. Q9–11(g): Disclosure, Surveillance, and EHS Residents deserve understandable information about wireless sources in or near their homes, including their characteristics and operating patterns. HHS should support privacy-protective reporting of symptoms and exposure circumstances and explicitly consider people with EHS among populations who may uniquely experience adverse effects. URGENT: SMART METERS AND INVOLUNTARY EXPOSURE Communication-enabled utility meters deserve specific, urgent attention. They may be installed on or immediately adjacent to homes, leaving residents little control over exposure. Because utilities are essential services, people may face fees, barriers, or penalties for requesting an alternative. For people with EHS, this can mean having a wireless transmitter at home without a meaningful ability to opt out. HHS should investigate meter transmission characteristics, real-world indoor exposure, placement near occupied rooms, and cumulative exposure alongside other wireless sources. Work with utility regulators to promote transparent disclosure, feasible non-wireless alternatives, fair accommodations, and protection against unreasonable fees or loss of essential service. This lack of choice requires action now, not research alone. EVERYDAY PRODUCTS AND THE RISK OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION The problem extends beyond utility meters. Cars, appliances, and an increasing range of everyday products incorporate microprocessors, electronic circuitry, and wireless technologies that people with EHS may have difficulty tolerating. As wireless technology becomes embedded in more necessities, finding usable products can become increasingly difficult and expensive. People may face the frightening prospect of being progressively pushed out of ordinary social life because transportation, household equipment, housing, and other necessities become inaccessible. What are people with EHS supposed to do as everyday life becomes harder to access? HHS should investigate these barriers and promote transparent product information, practical accommodations, and affordable alternatives. People should not be expected to withdraw from society or bear the entire burden of finding workable options themselves. Q14, Q17–18: Environmental Effects, Coordination, and Accountability Coordinate among FDA, NIH, CDC, and relevant regulators. Examine environmental effects and establish clear responsibility for follow-up. Research and standard-setting must be transparent and independent, with safeguards against conflicts of interest, regulatory capture, and undue industry influence. After approximately 14 years of living with these effects, I am asking for more than acknowledgment that further research is needed. People experiencing EHS need practical help now, alongside independent research and meaningful protections. No one should have to choose between essential services and a reasonable opportunity to reduce unwanted exposure. Please treat EHS as an urgent public-health, accessibility, accommodation, and consumer-protection issue.

Hello, prior to 2019 I began getting severe night sweats because my body was heating up during the early hours of the morning. Since 2019 I started to get ringing in my ears and a horrific vibration in my head which causes terrible sleep deprivation. I've been woken up with a horrible vibration/pressure pushing down on the crown of my skull. The second time this happened I felt it go into my skull. I get headaches, pressure in my head, zapping sounds and sensation in my ears. I've been to hospital with microwave radiation sickness where I felt I was dying, having a stroke and heart attack and I physically was sick. I've been woken up in the early Hours feeling like my heart was going to burst out my chest. Nose bleeds, Burns or skin rash. Feeling like someone's sticking pins in my eyes. The constant symptoms, sleep deprivation is torture. I live in the United Kingdom. North East in Gateshead NE96EY

Re-evaluate exposure standards beyond simple thermal heating limits ​The Issue: Current federal guidelines (primarily based on FCC limits established in 1996) focus almost exclusively on preventing immediate thermal tissue heating (the Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR limit) over short timeframes. ​The Recommendation: HHS should urge inter-agency coordination (with the FDA, CDC, and FCC) to evaluate non-thermal, long-term biological pathways. Current research demonstrates that fields far weaker than those required to heat tissue can induce cellular responses, primarily through: ​Oxidative stress and Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) generation, which can indirectly compromise cellular repair pathways and intracellular signaling over time. ​Disruption of cellular calcium homeostasis, affecting membrane dynamics and cellular stress protocols. ​2. Address cumulative, multi-source exposure in real-world environments ​The Issue: Safety thresholds are currently tested on individual devices in isolation (e.g., testing a single smartphone near a model head). ​The Recommendation: HHS should fund public health surveillance and exposure modeling that reflects modern, real-world conditions. Modern environments involve concurrent, continuous exposures from multiple sources—including Wi-Fi networks, smart meters, cellular networks, wearables, and spatial transmission antennas—operating simultaneously over decades. ​3. Establish specialized protective frameworks for vulnerable populations ​The Issue: Uniform safety thresholds assume a standardized adult physiology and do not account for biological variability across demographics. ​The Recommendation: Regulatory guidelines should implement explicit safety margins for sensitive populations: ​Children and Adolescents: Thinner skull bones, higher water content in biological tissue, and developing nervous systems lead to deeper relative RF energy penetration. ​Occupational Workers: Individuals with prolonged high-density field exposures in specific industries or environments. ​Medical Device Users: Individuals with implanted cardiac or neurological electronics sensitive to external field interference. ​4. Clear scientific terminology and clear public communication ​The Issue: The term "radiation" often creates confusion between high-energy ionizing radiation (such as X-rays or nuclear fallout, which cause direct DNA strand breaks) and low-energy non-ionizing radiation (such as RF/EMF, which operate through indirect biophysical mechanisms). Public guidance is often either overly alarmist or dismissively vague. ​The Recommendation: HHS should establish clear, transparent public health communication based on precautionary principles: ​Clearly distinguish between ionizing damage and non-thermal cellular stress mechanisms. ​Provide practical, low-cost "exposure hygiene" guidance (e.g., hardwiring home networks, keeping transmitting devices at a distance from the body during sleep, using speakerphones) so citizens can reduce unnecessary chronic exposure without unnecessary panic. ​5. Prioritize independent, human-relevant research initiatives ​The Issue: Much of the existing literature relies on either high-dose animal studies (e.g., the National Toxicology Program study) or in-vitro petri dish models that do not translate directly to human systemic biology. ​The Recommendation: HHS should direct federal research funding toward: ​Longitudinal epidemiology tracking health outcomes in populations with measured (rather than self-reported) exposure data. ​Biomarker discovery to identify whether specific individuals possess heightened biological sensitivity to non-thermal fields.

2013 a cell tower was installed a couple hundred meters from my house. A couple months later I was diagnosed with A pulmonary embolism and collapsed while being treated for that and was also diagnosed with Paracarditis. Spent 2 months hospitalized. Relocated in 2016 to a rural area away from all the communications. Fast forward to 2024. S.M.A.R.T Meters forced upon everyone's home without consent, similar scenario. A couple months pass and I find myself dealing with heart failure. 1 month hospitalized and still feeling the effects daily with tinnitus and anxiety... Skeptical of any official survey, not knowing if this information will be used to remedy the problem or monitor its effectiveness as a weapon.