Children & vulnerable groups

Dear HHS Team, Re: your question No. 5, I co-founded Hilltown Health (hilltownhealth.org), a safe technology advocacy organization in Western MA, more than a decade ago following my wife's developing electromagnetic radiation syndrome (EMR-S) in 2010. We made a film about the above experience, under the auspices of the theatre company we co-founded in 2004 called "Canary in a Gold Mine" which was released several years ago (ptco.org/canary) In short, Hilltown Health has been collaborating with local planning boards to strengthen and update telecom by-laws as well as advocating for more transparency about RF/EMF health effects given the recent rollout of "smart" meters by our utilities, Eversource and National Grid. We have also reached out to school administrators about the involuntary exposure of school age children in classrooms. There are decision makers who receive evidence of harm (for example, the National Toxicology Program cell phone study: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/topics/cellphones or this review of health effects on children and pregnant women: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1915745/full) and are concerned enough to take action. However, many people in decision making positions, for a wide variety of reasons, have not taken any protective measures on behalf of the people for whom they are responsible. Perhaps the most significant reason for inaction is that the concerned federal agencies have generally indicated that the current exposure standards are protective. The majority of the public thinks the wireless devices they are buying (or installing in the case of educational institutions) have undergone some kind of government testing to ensure that long term exposures are safe. Of course, there has been no such testing. The technology is still too new to fully understand the cradle to grave impacts of 24X7, 365 days a year exposure. And the current "safety standards" were based on a test of one hour or less on a group of animals in the 1980's (see slide 19 of Dr. Kent Chamberlin's public talk in Greenfield, MA entitled "Smart Meters: Health, Safety and Opting-Out" given on November 13, 2025 just before smart meters were installed in Western MA with most residents either not knowing that opting out was an option, not realizing there was any cause for concern about wireless exposure from the meter or accompanying infrastructure or simply not being able to afford the opt out fee despite not wanting to be harmed in their home: https://www.hilltownhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Chamberlin-Slides.Smart-Meter-Presentation.Greenfield.pdf This has created a wild west atmosphere with huge amounts of money at stake and led to public comments, for example by a designer of the smart grid for one of our state utilities that he is not aware of any "credible research" indicating health impacts. We know there are thousands of studies going back to the US Navy research in the 1970's documenting health impacts: https://zoryglaser.com/ But the lack of any clear government guidance beyond a general denial / dismissal on the part of the FCC of there being any health effects emboldens those who have been charged by their corporations to maximize profit. In other words, there is a large scale game of "passing the buck" as in, "if you are concerned, take it up with the FCC." And the FCC saying that they rely on organizations like the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) comprised of industry-funded scientists as is well documented in the documentary "Microwaves, Science and Lies": https://vimeo.com/89144337 Meanwhile, my wife's life and the lives of many, many others have been decimated or simply lost in the case of victims of cell phone induced glioma: https://ehtrust.org/science/cell-phone-radiation-linked-to-brain-cancer-and-tumors-published-science/ Thank you for taking prompt action to rectify this inhuman situation which so closely resembles many other US public health disasters fueled by profits and captured agencies, ie, tobacco, Agent Orange, lead, the automobile industry before Nader, DDT, etc. In addition to updating the safety standards, thank you for considering, the design of "off ramps" for stakeholders who are justifiably concerned about massive losses in class action suits if they were to acknowledge wireless injury. Just as auto makers wound up competing on safety, the wireless industry is very capable of doing the same in the context of a thoughtful policy environment. In the long term, they will be grateful for your help. The engineers and PR people doing the day to day work @ Big Tech are not motivated by the opportunity to harm. But most people are not eager to lose their employment which is currently the bind any potential whistleblower would find themselves in. And thank you for your service.

Emf's are terrible for humans and leading to our declining bee population. The change we implement now can save our children

I am writing as a concerned parent and member of the public to urge the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a thorough, independent evaluation of the potential health effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), particularly radiofrequency (RF) radiation from wireless technologies. I am concerned that current U.S. exposure standards may not adequately account for the full range of potential biological effects of RF radiation. Although non-ionizing radiation does not have the same properties as ionizing radiation, the absence of sufficient energy to directly ionize atoms does not, by itself, establish that all forms of non-ionizing exposure are biologically harmless. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate the full body of scientific literature, including research investigating potential effects beyond established thermal mechanisms, long-term exposure, and impacts on children. I am also concerned about the influence of industry on the development of wireless safety standards and the independence of the regulatory process. I encourage HHS to examine the issues raised in Norm Alster's Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission Is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates and to ensure that future assessments are transparent, scientifically rigorous, and free from undue industry influence. Safety standards should reflect an independent assessment of the evidence and be updated when warranted by new findings. Other countries have adopted different approaches to wireless exposure limits and precautionary measures, particularly in settings involving children. I ask HHS to compare U.S. standards with international approaches, identify the scientific evidence underlying those differences, and explain whether research considered in other countries has been adequately evaluated in the United States. Particular attention should be given to evidence concerning children, long-term exposure, and the potential effects of cumulative or repeated exposure. I also wish to share a personal observation as a parent. From a very young age, my daughter has repeatedly appeared noticeably flushed when near devices such as mobile phones and laptops for a period of time. I have observed this pattern over many years, and it concerns me that I have not received a satisfactory explanation for it. I recognize that an observation alone cannot establish the cause or mechanism of a physical reaction. Nevertheless, I believe experiences like this deserve careful, objective investigation rather than dismissal, and that further research is needed to understand whether any relationship exists between reported symptoms and RF/EMF exposure. I urge HHS to apply a precautionary, public-health-centered approach while scientific uncertainties remain. This should include commissioning and supporting independent research, reviewing the adequacy of existing exposure standards, investigating potential effects on children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and making the scientific basis for its conclusions publicly accessible. Research priorities should include areas where evidence is conflicting, where significant knowledge gaps remain, and where existing standards may not fully address the questions raised by emerging research. Technological progress and public health should not be treated as competing priorities. The public deserves confidence that wireless technologies are evaluated through an impartial, transparent, and comprehensive scientific process, and that economic interests do not take precedence over the protection of human health. I ask HHS to take these concerns seriously and to ensure that safety is demonstrated through rigorous evaluation rather than assumed in advance.

The current fairly unregulated use of EMFs via the abundant towers is unacceptable for the general health of all people and especially children. There is enough research at this point to acknowledges that the current EMF frequencies are harmful to everyones health and general well being. Some have mentioned the destruction of the mitochondria and the inability of the body to adjust to the firing and perpetual bombardment of frequencies not compatible with humans and probably any animals. These frequencies can probably be made more harmonious for all living beings but have not been. The question is why not? Cell phones have been linked with brain tumors and the current views of some doctors is that 50% of people will develop Alzheimers. One contributor is most likely cell phones and the lack of awareness of the dangers of using them next to the head. Why is there no information presented with the purchase of these devices. this needs to changes as well as once again the frequencies being used.

Our environment is a shared, communal resource. The air we breathe, the land we inhabit, and the spaces where our children grow are not the exclusive property of industry, companies, utilities, or stockholders. Yet corporations profit from infrastructure that introduces electromagnetic exposures into environments shared by families with little opportunity to object. Telecommunications providers, SMUD, PG&E, and Comcast benefit economically from expanding electrical and wireless infrastructure. Meanwhile, children and communities may bear environmental and health risks without informed participation, compensation, or adequate long-term scientific assurances. The profits are privatized, while potential risks are distributed across the public. As a mother, I invest my body, time, resources, and energy into my children's health. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, nutrition, education, and medical care are investments in their neurological development, cellular health, and future well-being. Why should corporations introduce additional environmental exposures without adequately demonstrating their long-term safety for developing children? Children are stakeholders. They cannot negotiate exposure conditions, commission independent studies, or participate in infrastructure decisions. Their inability to consent creates a greater ethical responsibility for adults, corporations, and government agencies. The long-term neurological effects of chronic RF exposure, particularly during critical developmental periods, warrant independent investigation. I am concerned about mitochondrial function, cellular homeostasis, oxidative stress, neurological signaling, reproductive development, and potential intergenerational consequences. The absence of conclusive evidence of harm does not establish safety under every exposure condition. There is also a serious security concern. Telecommunications and electrical infrastructure are increasingly interconnected with digital control systems. Cybersecurity vulnerabilities, unauthorized access, deliberate interference, and malicious manipulation deserve independent assessments. These systems should be protected against misuse, including intentional disruption or hazardous operation. What safeguards prevent infrastructure designed for communication and electrical distribution from being deliberately misused to harm the public? I request transparent cybersecurity oversight, independent vulnerability assessments, enforceable security standards, and public accountability without disclosure of sensitive security details. Under principles of environmental justice, nonmaleficence, intergenerational equity, and responsible stewardship, government must consider every affected stakeholder—not merely infrastructure owners, investors, and commercial beneficiaries. The public should not have to finance private environmental testing, establish individual medical causation, or suffer injury before legitimate concerns receive investigation. I request that HHS recommend a precautionary pause on further wireless infrastructure expansion in residential and child-centered environments pending independent review of long-term developmental risks. I also request evaluation of removal or relocation of existing towers where site-specific evidence demonstrates unacceptable exposure or safety risks. I request independent longitudinal research, publicly accessible exposure measurements, meaningful community participation, and regulatory coordination among HHS, FCC, EPA, and appropriate state authorities. I do not consent to my children being treated as involuntary experimental subjects in an environment where long-term exposure questions remain unresolved. Environmental exposure does not automatically constitute human-subjects research under federal law. However, widespread exposure under scientific uncertainty raises profound ethical questions about informed participation, precaution, and justice in distributing potential harm. No corporation should receive the economic benefits of technological expansion while transferring potentially preventable health and environmental costs to children and future generations without accountability. Our children are not collateral costs of technological progress. Their neurological development, cellular health, bodily integrity, and environmental inheritance deserve consideration before additional infrastructure is approved. I demand that public-health protection take precedence over unchecked expansion, that existing infrastructure be independently evaluated, and that future generations receive the protection and representation they cannot yet demand for themselves. Respectfully submitted, Cherrish “I Do Not Consent” Castaneda Mother of Three | Student of Law and Bioethics Sacramento County, California

I have been aware of health risks from Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and RF wireless radiation for many years. Here is a website that has a list of research links for your consideration: https://ehtrust.org/send-science-to-the-fcc-govt-is-asking-for-evidence-you-can-help-now/ Because I have been aware of the dangers, to the best of my ability, I have created a safe environment for my husband, our son, and I where I can better control the RF wireless radiation levels inside of our home. We do not have WIFI in our home and haven't for years. We have internet but we have it safely hard-wired. 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. 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 digital meters and they gladly obliged. We take all these measures, and I could go on listing more, because we are aware of the dangers of exposure to EMF and other sources of RF wireless radiation. 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, cell phones, wireless and digital “smart” utility meters, public Wi-Fi, and other sources of RF wireless radiation. The last thing I want on or around my home and my child is a cell tower or wireless smart meter. I am completely opposed to 2-way wireless "smart" utility meters, digital utility meters, and opt-out fees. Wireless smart meters are data collecting devices that were forced on Americans and they emit harmful radiation. I have participated and continue to participate in state and national campaigns asking for utility meter choice legislation. I have collected signatures of Ohioans opposed to these meters and have sent them to state lawmakers. Here is a link for a national campaign for utility meter choice legislation: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/community-forum/support-utility-meter-choice/ I have filed several complaints already about smart and digital meters with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to only be ignored. I do not like the wireless smart meter "opt out" option that we currently are offered because it cancels our own rights when we do so. With this option, we’ve had to AGREE to ALLOW utility providers and unknown 3rd party companies, to violate our constitutional rights – so we are legally consenting to being violated. Why should my "option" (opt out) be coercion to violate my own rights? That doesn't seem like an option to me. I have sent the CEO of my gas and electric utility provider, AES an Affidavit of Truth stating many points of intent to harm and multiple violations to my rights and I’ve received no rebuttal. Because I received no rebuttal, my affidavit stands as truth. Listed in the affidavit are my constitutional rights that have the potential to be violated, if I am forced against my will, into a smart or digital meter. I know my family’s health will 100% be affected by these types of meters. It’s not a matter of IF, but WHEN, we will be sick as long as we have it, being forever. We want old-fashioned analog meters but we have been forced to settle for digital meters (for which we pay opt-out fees) which are safer than smart meters but still not as safe as analog meters. Over 1,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies have demonstrated serious adverse health effects from the wireless radiation coming from cell phones, cell towers, and the "smart" meters radiating our homes and other buildings 24/7. This includes DNA damage, infertility and reproductive damage, cardiac effects and arrest, neurological conditions (anxiety, depression, Alzheimer's), immune system dysfunction, and even cancer. 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 all these years later the FCC still has not responded to the courts and is refusing to regulate the Telecoms. The reality is NO ONE is measuring our cumulative daily human exposure of EMF “electro smog” 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/ I ask that HHS make more Americans aware of risks from wireless devices and infrastructure so they can create healthier homes and communities for their families too. Thank you for accepting my comment.

Comment of the Coalition of Mothers, Rebekah Ricks, President and Co-Founder, Winter Haven, Florida, in Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397. Our letter is attached. It responds to Questions 9 and 15(a) as numbered in the notice. Florida shows the gap. Florida now generally bars elementary and middle school students from using their own wireless devices during the school day (s. 1006.07(2)(f), Fla. Stat., as amended by Ch. 2025-109, Laws of Fla.). Our state has decided that a child's phone at school is a question of public policy. Yet the district's own wireless access points, which transmit whether or not a child's phone is off, are not addressed. We searched chapters 1001 through 1013 of the Florida Statutes and chapter 6A of the Florida Administrative Code and found no requirement that a district tell parents what wireless equipment operates in their child's classroom. A Florida mother can learn the school's rule on her child's phone. She cannot learn what is installed above her child's desk. Question 9. We ask the Department to recommend a short notice that schools and licensed child care providers post for parents, listing the wireless equipment in each classroom, when it operates, whether a wired option exists, and whom to call with questions. Disclosure makes no health finding. It treats parents as the decision-makers they already are in every other part of school life. Question 15(a). No federal agency publishes the number of transmitters within a defined distance of a school or licensed child care facility, and no federal agency has measured RF levels in an occupied American classroom. We ask the Department to make both a research priority, and to give particular attention to rooms serving the youngest children. We support the fuller comment filed in this docket by Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids (PERK), which addresses the remaining questions with primary-source citations. Prepared by Rebekah Ricks. Contact: rricks@thecoalitionofmothers.com.

I spent a long time wondering whether it was even worth writing anything, given that it is well known that electromagnetic waves are harmful not only to humans but also to animals, insects, and the natural world—they are lethal to us all. We are destroying everything that surrounds us. Nevertheless, I want to highlight how our health and lives are being ruined. For the past six years, I have lived 40 feet away from a cell tower. It was erected despite legal regulations prohibiting it—but such rules pose no obstacle for brazen corporations. What is it like to live near a cell tower? My older son had to flee our home after three years because he was suffocating and unable to breathe. Whenever he left for school, he felt perfectly fine; but whenever he returned home for the holidays or breaks, the nightmare would begin—to such an extent that he had to leave the family home for good, as his breathing attacks were so severe they became life-threatening. Two years later, my younger son began suffering from such intense suffocation that he had to leave the house at night just to save his life. Today, even though he is still a minor, he no longer lives with his parents, because our home poses a direct threat to his health and life. Why this conclusion? Because for the past four years, every time he left the house, he experienced immense relief—the breathing attacks would simply not occur whenever he was away from home or our own yard. He had to move out to save his life. We, his parents, tried to hold on for quite a long time—we loved our home and this place too much to simply leave—but today, we too are fleeing; the impact of the waves has become so unbearable that we can no longer function. As for me—the person writing this—my kidneys, liver, and pancreas have all failed. The headaches are so severe that they offer no respite, neither by day nor by night. And it’s not just my family’s life that has been destroyed. We live in a protected area—designated "conservation land"—yet that didn't stop criminals from a telecommunications company, in collusion with city officials, from cutting down dozens of trees to erect a tower. The tower quickly began killing the young trees surrounding the site; now, the area is littered with the stumps of dead trees. It’s impossible to take a photograph right now—the leaves have fallen, so the truly horrifying sight isn't as visible. In our own yard, we have over a dozen fruit trees and bushes—yet for the past four years, there hasn't been a single piece of fruit—not one!—despite thousands of blossoms on every tree. What happened? All the bees have been wiped out; even the ones we tried to bring in couldn't survive. Nature destroyed, insects gone, human health ruined—all while the company reaps profits from our tragedy. This is the kind of state we are forced to live in. Today, these towers are being expanded threefold, even though the conditions for such expansion were strictly defined—yet no one adheres to them. After all, who would care about people or nature? One can only hope that the evil being perpetrated will eventually catch up with those who cause it—let’s hope so!

I have become severely electromagnetically sensitive since early 2019. Symptoms began in the summer of 2018 when my hands began to tingle and burn when using my cell phone, especially if I was on the Internet. My symptoms became increasingly worse in April-May 2019. I was working in an office for several days a week for long hours and was surrounded by much office equipment—such as my computer, computer modem, high powered Wi-Fi router close by, copy machine, telephone/intercom system, adding machine, walkie talkie, space heater, florescent lighting, and antenna above me on the metal roof. Some of my initial symptoms were: burning/tingling/pain in my hands while holding all of the following—cell phone, landline telephone, adding machine, computer mouse. I also experienced major nerve pain and burning in my teeth and nasal passageways, my body overheating (worse than a heat flash), burning lips and eyes, brain fog, eye pain, irritation, insomnia, pressure headaches where it felt like my brain was being squeezed, and fatigue. I began to have trouble finding any place in my home where I could feel good or sleep pain-free. It got so bad that even the motor on my refrigerator running, cooking on my stove, or using my washer and dryer were bringing me physical pain. The increase in my symptoms and the severity of them developed quickly over a matter of weeks. I went to a functional medicine doctor. I also distanced myself from much of the technology that was giving me pain. I began unplugging Wi-Fi in our home, using my cell phone much much less, putting it on airplane mode often, and never carrying it in my pocket again. I also put it outside of the bedroom at night. Yes, even electrical appliances were affecting me. Very quickly my body became hyper sensitive to electromagnetic radiation. I can testify that this is real, and not something I created in my head. I am not afraid of technology nor my cell phone, but this technology has become a curse rather than a blessing to me. Most people cannot understand that this radiation is affecting them biologically in a very negative way until something like this happens to them. Or until the FCC makes people more aware of the dangers of what many people are facing as more and more become hyper sensitive by constant accumulation and overexposure. Then they may begin to take precautions. How I wish I had been more aware and more careful of what this toxic burden can do. Even young children are being over exposed to these frequencies in their homes and schools. These technologies have been with them from before birth and will be with them their whole lives. I fear for them and what they will face when their bodies cannot withstand the harms of these frequencies that are almost everywhere. If only their parents were aware of the harms and took precautions to protect their babies and children. I cry thinking about a baby or child experiencing the pain that I have daily and not being able to understand or explain what’s going on. I have researched this topic since 2018 and have read many well written and informative books from doctors about this environmental poison that we are all living in. Still too many people unaware. Still too many of the medical doctors tell us we are crazy. I have added a few links below that have been very well done and from experts about the harms of the radiation and m/w and radio frequencies, etc. Please have a good long look at the 2012 BioInitiative Report for valuable info. And please do tell me, why haven’t more safety studies been done, improved upon , updated and put out for the public consumers for almost 25 years? 24 years overdue. This is unbelievable and unacceptable. Where are the agencies within our governments who care about the health of its people, and especially our children? Not to mention the birds, bees, insects, animals and even plant life. These man-made frequencies are affecting all of life on earth. Please, please, please help those of us who are likened to the canaries in the coal mines, to make this world a much safer place for humans , animals and all of God’s created things. All we desire is to live in a place where we can be productive, pain-free, and live to our potential. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e10wCiI6Ak https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=F0NEaPTu9oI https://www.seekinghealth.com/blogs/education/emf-sensitivity-and-electromagnetic-hypersensitivity-why-some-people-react-and-what-actually-helps https://drnatashaf.com/sensitivity-to-emfs/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6513191/ https://www.greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/electromagnetic-field-harms https://www.positivehealth.com/article/environmental/the-neurological-impact-of-electromagnetic-fields-emf-beyond-headaches https://neurolaunch.com/emf-effects-on-the-brain/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l13WHrMoTXQ

All types of man-made EMFs/EMR – in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR – are polarized. Polarized EMFs/EMR can have increased biological activity, due to 1) Ability to produce constructive interference effects and amplify their intensities at many locations. 2) Ability to force all charged/polar molecules and especially free ions within and around all living cells to oscillate on parallel planes and in phase with the applied polarized field. Such ionic forced-oscillations exert additive electrostatic forces on the sensors of cell membrane electro-sensitive ion channels, resulting in their irregular gating and consequent disruption of the cell’s electrochemical balance. These features render man-made EMFs/EMR more bioactive than natural non-ionizing EMFs/EMR. This explains the increasing number of biological effects discovered during the past few decades to be induced by man-made EMFs, in contrast to natural EMFs. Scientific Literature: -The fetal stage of life is the most vulnerable to any toxic exposure. Kaiser researcher Dr. De-Kun Li (2017) performed a robust prospective cohort study of over 900 pregnant women revealing the strong association between exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from a variety of sources and miscarriage with nearly a 3 fold increase risk. This study supports and strengthens prior research. He states, “This study provides fresh evidence, directly from a human population, that MF non-ionizing radiation could have adverse biological impacts on human health.” -Relationship between the Exposure to Magnetic Fields during Pregnancy and Risk of Abortion: A Review Article. (2020) Ebadi A et al.INT J PEDIATRICS. Vol 8, August 2020. http://ijp.mums.ac.ir/article_16183.html -Association Between Maternal Exposure to Magnetic Field Nonionizing Radiation During Pregnancy and Risk of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Offspring in a Longitudinal Birth Cohort.(2020) Li DK et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(3):e201417. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2763232?guestAccessKey=cda77a0a-bfb6-4f74-99e0-0bdd2909bdb2&utm_source=silverchair&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=article_alert-jamanetworkopen&utm_term=mostread&utm_content=olf-widget_03302020 -Risk of congenital heart disease due to exposure to common electrical appliances during early pregnancy: a case-control study. (2020) Zhao D et al. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2020 Sep 19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32949363/ -Mother’s Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields before and during Pregnancy is Associated with Risk of Speech Problems in Offspring. (2019) Zarei, S., et al. Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering 9(1):61-68 (2019). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30881935 -Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child behavior problems in five birth cohorts. (2017) International Society for Environmental Epidemiology. 2017. https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/isee/2016-o-021-4271/ -Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A Prospective Cohort Study. (2017) Li et al. Sci Rep. 2017 Dec 13;7(1):17541. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5727515/ -Association between electromagnetic field exposure and abortion in pregnant women living in Tehran. (2016) Abad M et al. Int J Reprod Biomed. 2016 May; 14(5): 347–354. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4910032 -Oxidative stress of brain and liver is increased by Wi-Fi (2.45GHz) exposureal.J Chem Neuroanat. 2015 Oct 28. pii: S0891-0618(15)00074-5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26520617 -Maternal cell phone and cordless phone use during pregnancy and behaviour problems in 5-year-old children. Guxens M et al. (2013) J Epidemiol Community Health. 2013 May;67(5):432-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23386674 -Maternal exposure to magnetic fields during pregnancy in relation to the risk of asthma in offspring. (2011) Li DK1, Chen H, Odouli R. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.2011 Oct;165(10):945-50. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21810627 -A nested case-control study of residential and personal magnetic field measures and miscarriages. (2002) Lee GM et al. 2002 Jan;13(1):21-31. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11805582 -A population-based prospective cohort study of personal exposure to magnetic fields during pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage. (2002) Li DK et al. Epidemiology. 2002 Jan;13(1):9-20. -Critical periods of vulnerability for the developing nervous system: evidence from humans and animal models. Deborah Rice , Stan Barone. (2000) Environ Health Perspect 108(suppl 3):511–533 (2000). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.281.957 -Neuronal Death and Oxidative Stress in the Developing Brain. Chrysanthy Ikonomidou. (2011) Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. April 2011, Vol. 14, No. 8: 1535-1550. http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/ars.2010.3581