Children & vulnerable groups

I live in a neighboring town to Ripon, California. In 2019, four students and three staff members at a local elementary school (Weston Elementary), were diagnosed with cancer. They battled with Sprint and eventually the cell tower was moved away from the school. We need to have safe zones for neighborhoods and schools where these towers are far away. Children are developing and we need to protect them from the harms of EMF's.

I urge HHS to prioritize independent research into the potential long-term health effects of radiofrequency radiation and to transparently evaluate whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. My concerns include possible cancer risks, exposure beginning in childhood and continuing throughout life, and whether research adequately reflects today’s devices and exposure patterns. There are scientific findings that warrant follow-up. The National Toxicology Program’s studies found clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas and some evidence of malignant brain gliomas in male rats exposed to radiofrequency radiation. These were high-exposure animal studies using signals associated with 2G and 3G technology; they do not establish that everyday wireless exposure or 5G causes cancer in humans. Nevertheless, they deserve careful investigation. Human research also needs to be represented accurately. The large COSMOS cohort study did not find increased brain-tumor risk among people with the greatest cumulative mobile-phone call time. Reassuring findings should inform policy alongside animal findings and remaining uncertainties. I ask HHS to: • Fund independent, long-term research, including studies of children, contemporary wireless technologies, and well-characterized exposure levels. • Evaluate cancer, reproductive and developmental outcomes, sleep, and neurological symptoms, clearly distinguishing established effects from preliminary findings. • Review exposure standards transparently and explain how they address long-term exposure and potentially vulnerable populations. • Require disclosure of research funding and conflicts of interest. • Offer practical, proportionate guidance for people who wish to reduce exposure, including increasing distance from phones during calls. People reporting symptoms they associate with electromagnetic exposure deserve respectful clinical attention and rigorous investigation without assuming the cause in advance. The public deserves clear information about what is known, what remains uncertain, and what evidence would justify stronger protections.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this very important topic! I have been very concerned about the increasing amount and strength of EMF from all sources, especially the ones that the general population does not have an option to opt out of, like smart meters, cell phone towers, 5G, etc. There are numerous health studies that I have heard about from Europe, where scientists have been studying the effect of man-made radiation on people, and the results are catastrophic. I am especially concerned about children. I myself am sensitive to radiation, and depending on the strength and length of time of the exposure, I get headaches and nose bleeds. I also have a child who had a health issue that is very likely to be at least partially caused by radiation damage, but definitely has been effected negatively by exposure. My child's symptoms range from flu like symptoms to bone and joint pain. I would love if the negative health effect of radiation exposure at any level would be more seriously investigated, and European research and limits would be studied and utilized in the United States as well. Sincerely, a concerned mother and citizen

I am extremely concerned about the rapid expansion of wireless towers near our homes, neighborhoods, and schools. These towers are being installed everywhere, often without families having any meaningful say in how close they are placed to where we live and raise our children. This recently became very personal for me when I learned that a new tower is going up approximately 0.3 miles from my home… my family’s safe space. I am angry and deeply upset that infrastructure transmitting RF radiation can be placed this close to homes without stronger protections for the families who live there. I am especially concerned about children. They spend hours every day at schools and daycares and potentially have an entire lifetime of wireless exposure ahead of them. We need more independent research into long-term and RF exposure, especially in children. There should absolutely be mandatory minimum setbacks between wireless towers and homes, schools, and daycares. I believe they should be at least one mile away or more! Every tower should also be independently tested after installation and regularly thereafter to determine how much RF is actually reaching nearby homes and schools. Those measurements should be publicly available so families know what levels are reaching the places where they spend their lives. Technology is advancing quickly, and our research and protections need to keep up. Parents and homeowners deserve transparency, meaningful community input, independent testing, and the ability to feel safe in their own homes. Please put the health and well-being of our children and communities first.

2: My perspective:myself & family 3a-c: WIFI mouse – rash on hand appeared after ~1yr. Wouldn’t go away until I stopped using it for a week. Rash came back upon return to use. Returned to wired mouse & rash hasn’t returned. AMR smart electric meter (precursor to AMI): Power company advised it transmitted data ~ 1-1:30 a.m., coinciding with same time I had begun awakening suddenly every night. I had the meter removed and replaced with a non-transmitting meter and now sleep through night (WIFI, bluetooth, & cell phone off also.) AMI smart electric meter (pulses every few seconds): installed without parents’ knowledge, on same wall where Dad’s (w/pacemaker) bed was. He experienced sudden decline in health, inexplicable bloodwork; Dr later said was very likely due to AMI meter (once that coinciding installation was discovered & discussed.) AMI meter replaced with a non-Smart meter and his blood work and health improved. AMI meters are also invasion of privacy with the data collection. WIFI & bluetooth(home): over time & exposure, several symptoms became regular occurrence: nervous tension, unexplained anxiety, heart palpitations, irritability, agitation, short-temper, brain fog, headaches, restless sleep (myself & family–bulk of/worst of symptoms alleviated when began keeping WIFI & bluetooth off most of the time, especially at night.) Still have some low-level symptoms; neighbors’ WIFI still infiltrates the house. WIFI (schools): mid-way through my child’s schooling, WIFI boosters were installed in the ceilings in the middle of classrooms. My child began to complain of headaches and agitation, and harder to focus. Symptoms would go away during Summer months & return when back in school. One of the schools was in very close proximity to a cell tower. Anecdotally, several cases of childhood leukemia and teachers with cancer have arisen over the yrs. WIFI + cell boosters (office): Installed ~every 30 feet on ceilings starting ~2018 & expanding throughout whole building complex during 2020-2024 era. Symptoms began shortly after installation and close daily exposure-i.e. creepy crawly sensation on skin, especially scalp/brain, low level to escalating headache and other symptoms including those noted above for WIFI at home exposure. Effects felt within about an hour of being in office. For a time, an accommodation to telework was allowed, but when up for review, it was refused. Since ADA doesn’t explicitly acknowledge EMF/EMR sensitivity as meeting the ADA guidelines for disability, the new management doesn’t either. 5G masts (around office complex) installed ~2020-2024 era: Walks of respite outside to give body a break from inside WIFI is no longer possible with the 5G masts. Electric vehicles: Even short infrequent rides in a friend’s electric vehicle gives me creepy crawly sensations and nervous system irritation. 3 doctors concur with EMF/EMR exposure as being the cause of the symptoms experienced. 5: The FCC should be compelled to comply with an order issued by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit in 2021 in the case Environmental Health Trust, et al. v. FCC (DC Cir 2021, No. 20-1025), ordering the FCC to address 11,000 pages of evidence on adverse impacts of wireless radiation before ANY legislation favorable to telecom and broadband expansion is even considered. I fear what will happen when towns lose all control over tower, small cell, and in/on-home placements. The focus on broadband deployment should be on safe, reliable fiber to homes, schools, and offices with ethernet connections, not unreliable, harmful wireless permeating the air. Americans with Disabilities Acct (ADA) - EMF/EMR sensitivity needs to be added as a protected class under the act. Guidance for those sensitive to EMF/EMR/wireless/bluetooth technologies needs to be unburied, acknowledged, updated, and disseminated to employers and those with public access buildings. Offices and public buildings should be inspected and remediated by building biologists certified in Electromagnetic and Electro Radio Frequencies, such as the Building Biology Institute. 13: The growing proliferation makes it an extremely difficult and dismal future for those who are sensitive or have pre-existing conditions. Those who are not yet, could easily become so with increased exposures and intensities. 15: Cancer/health issue clusters/declines & symptomologies known to be related to EMF’s in relation to human and animal health; local animal, bird, insect population declines, health of native flora & fauna vs invasive proliferations, increases in molds. No wireless infrastructures should be in/around any of these places. Wired should be the norm. I submit what Sayer Ji has put together as evidence: https://open.substack.com/pub/sayerji/p/secretary-kennedy-asked-for-the-evidence?r=2ri5rr&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

NO MORE 5G , 6G. The towers are making us sick. And feel so bad. There are children in this world we deserve the life that God wanted us to have. Stop being greedy, money is not everything in life.

I minimize my exposure to wireless radiation because if I don't, I get debilitating headaches. My house is hard-wired to ethernet, but last year my city (Longmont CO) installed smart meters; the "opt-out" was still a smart meter creating dirty electricity. There are 4 smart meters clustered in my neighbor's yard, very close to my bedroom. I would wake up with a headache daily. I purchased a "Blushield" device to help mitigate the effect of the EMFs and that helped with my headaches. It is unbelievable that we don't have a choice about the enormous amount of EMF exposure and many people are suffering greatly. I am lucky that my symptoms are manageable, but it necessitates limiting my exposure; I cannot be in large public gatherings where everyone has their cellphone on (i.e. sporting events, lectures, concerts, etc); the last time I tried this I experienced vertigo, lightheadedness, dizziness, and nausea. PLEASE STUDY THE EFFECTS OF EMFS ON PEOPLE, especially children, as well as plants, insects (bees), and animals, before we continue into next generation 6G, 7G.

I submit this comment requesting independent scientific investigation, transparent environmental monitoring, and stronger public accountability regarding electromagnetic field (EMF), WIFI, and ELF exposure and its potential effects on human health, cellular function, neurological development, and future generations. The expansion of telecommunications and electrical infrastructure raises legitimate public-health and bioethical questions. Wireless RF radiation and extremely low-frequency (ELF) fields, including 60 Hz power transmission, have distinct physical characteristics and must be evaluated separately, including their potential cumulative and long-term effects. Located on schools, churches and parks. Children are stakeholders, not merely passive recipients of technological development. Their developing nervous systems, cellular processes, and longer potential lifetime exposures warrant specific scientific attention. Pregnancy, fetal development, infancy, and childhood represent critical periods during which environmental influences may have lasting consequences. Human health depends upon cellular homeostasis, mitochondrial bioenergetics, ATP production, DNA integrity, and coordinated neurological signaling. Disruption of these processes can contribute to disease and impaired development. Whether particular environmental EMF exposures adversely affect these mechanisms, and under what conditions, requires rigorous investigation rather than unsupported assumptions of either harm or safety. HHS should prioritize research examining oxidative stress, mitochondrial signaling, membrane potential, cellular repair, neurodevelopment, reproductive outcomes, and potential intergenerational effects. Studies must distinguish correlation from causation and evaluate exposure intensity, frequency, duration, developmental stage, and individual susceptibility. Existing epidemiological research has identified associations between certain residential ELF magnetic-field exposures and childhood leukemia, although a causal relationship remains unestablished. Such findings demonstrate the importance of continued investigation rather than premature dismissal of unresolved questions. The ethical question extends beyond whether an exposure meets current regulatory limits. It concerns whether those limits adequately account for developing biological systems, prolonged exposure, combined environmental conditions, and populations not sufficiently represented in existing research. Under principles of environmental justice, nonmaleficence, transparency, and intergenerational equity, the public deserves meaningful access to scientific findings and environmental exposure information. The burden of investigating potential public-health risks should not fall exclusively upon families who lack the resources to commission environmental testing or independent scientific evaluations. Communities should have access to infrastructure information, standardized exposure measurements, monitoring results, and understandable explanations of applicable safety standards. Public participation must be meaningful, particularly where infrastructure affects residential neighborhoods, schools, and vulnerable populations. I request that HHS: Support independent longitudinal studies evaluating RF, EMF and ELF exposures, particularly during pregnancy, infancy, and childhood. Investigate cellular and neurological mechanisms, including mitochondrial function, ATP metabolism, oxidative regulation, and neurodevelopment, using reproducible methods. Evaluate cumulative and chronic exposure patterns while distinguishing established effects from emerging hypotheses. Assess potential ecological consequences for wildlife, pollinators, vegetation, and interconnected environmental systems. Establish transparent public reporting of exposure measurements, research limitations, funding sources, and regulatory assumptions. Examine disproportionate environmental burdens and ensure meaningful stakeholder participation in research and policy development. Coordinate with the FCC, EPA, and relevant agencies to address scientific gaps and clarify oversight responsibilities. The absence of conclusive evidence of harm is not equivalent to conclusive evidence of safety under every exposure condition. Scientific uncertainty requires investigation, not speculation or complacency. Technological advancement carries corresponding responsibilities. Public-health protection should not depend upon proving widespread injury after exposure has occurred. Children, families, communities, ecosystems, and future generations are stakeholders in decisions affecting shared environments. Our responsibility is not simply to accommodate technological progress, but to ensure that progress does not compromise the biological integrity, developmental potential, and environmental inheritance of generations yet to come. Respectfully, Cherrish Castaneda Roots Indigenous Priory Sacramento County, California

I am 92 years old and was told about the ill effects of wireless radiation and how it can affect peoples' lives. I now live in Oxford, CT. I am very surprised and concerned that the Oxford, CT schools would allow a cell tower to practically overlook the playground of an elementary school. Not only is there one school near the tower, but there are a total of three schools within about a quarter of a mile from the tower! The radiation from the tower could cause possible damage to the children, teachers, and staff which would impact them later in life. I think the federal government should regulate the placement of these towers and make sure they are not near any schools. I was a school teacher for 23 years with the Farmingdale School District on Long Island. I taught fourth and fifth grade. If I was teaching at the school where the cell tower is here in Oxford, I would have protested the placement of the tower in that location. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS's Request for Information on EMFs, RF Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure (Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397). I am responding as a parent of young children and as a licensed mental health professional in a rural community. Our long-established town of about 600 people is getting a new 5G tower in its center, near where our children live, learn, and play. It is not yet active. Like many small communities, we are receiving wireless upgrades without any meaningful say in the matter, and without independent information about what they mean for our children's health. I urge HHS to fund a prospective, longitudinal study of communities where new wireless infrastructure, including 5G and future 6G, has been installed but not yet activated. The study should: 1. Establish a baseline before activation, including physical health measures and behavioral, sleep, attention, and mood assessments, with particular attention to children. 2. Measure actual RF exposure in homes, schools, and public spaces before and after activation. 3. Follow the same participants at regular intervals afterward to look for change. 4. Be conducted by researchers with no financial ties to the wireless industry, with funding, methods, and data made public. Rural communities are rarely consulted on these upgrades, and they should be included in this research. Thank you for giving families an opportunity to be heard.