Children & vulnerable groups

Dear Department of Health and human services, The UK government has found conclusive evidence that vulnerable populations (children, sick, and elderly) are the most susceptible to having negative effects of being within 600 m of cell phone towers and power lines. Leukemia, and other developmental impairments are linked to the substantial increase of 24/7 EMF and RF exposure. In most urban areas, cell towers are within 600 m of each other- compounding the EMF pollution. The UK has regulations on cell phone and power companies on the proximity and amount of towers that emit EMF and RF for the safe guard of their most vulnerable populations. The research that is relied upon by cellphone and power companies often benefit their profit margins as well as commuting their responsibilities and risks of their operations to other entities or pollution centers. The classic, “nothing to see here” and “look a that a way” tactic of purely self preserving opportunists. Yet, research that has shown that EMF and or RF pollution have negligible impacts on people’s health, growth, development, and resilience; firstly, do not take into account Quality of Life and secondly, are taken from research samples of healthy, 18-35 year old, military strong men. The research in favor of confident unregulated EMF and RF fail to include women, children, infirm, autoimmune, mentally ill, elderly, and other less predictable populations in our country. Reminding the Department of Health and Human Services of their role to protect the health of all humans in our great nation, not simply the strong and resilient, would be patronizing. Instead, I have faith that by the simple request for feedback on this matter is an absolute testament to the DHHS’s commitment to the “least among us”. Personally, my mom (a disabled veteran) suffers from severe sensitivity to EMF and RF pollution. It is such that she cannot think clearly with any device or tower near by. She lives in a constant state of vague distress. She’s Hispanic and she may literally be the first one on our family to be exposed to EMF and RF pollution. My husband and I have experienced terrible reactions to living within 100m of a new 5G tower, including hallucinations and mood disturbances. Pollinators and birds lose their ability to navigate. Children retain their primitive reflexes and our already vulnerable elderly have reduced neuroplasticity. It would be important to take care of these people versus protecting Cell phone and power companies bottom line. Thank you for your time and consideration.

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 support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

While EMFs affect all ages, children are uniquely vulnerable and deserve special consideration. They are exposed to wireless radiation at increasingly young ages, often beginning during pregnancy and continuing throughout childhood and adulthood in their homes, schools, communities, and workplaces. The widespread use of screens and wireless devices has become normalized and encouraged, while questions about hazardous, long-term and cumulative exposure effects remain routinely ignored by federal regulatory agencies and government authorities. The FCC’s current RF exposure guidelines were established in 1996 and are fundamentally flawed and outdated. Wireless technology and infrastructure has exploded since the guidelines were introduced, and yet the industry has actively suppressed the extensive body of scientific literature that clearly demonstrates harm to people and the environment. Furthermore, federal regulatory agencies have yet to demonstrate to the public that the FCC’s decades-old RF exposure guidelines adequately protect children, other vulnerable populations and the environment from the risks of exposure. Rather than continuing to dramatically expand population-wide wireless radiation exposure, we should exercise a precautionary approach when it comes to wireless and take this opportunity to thoroughly examine the current state of scientific literature and conduct new studies that appropriately consider the long-term consequences of ubiquitous and cumulative exposure to current and future wireless environments. That means supporting independent research into the health and developmental effects of RF radiation, particularly the effects on children, pregnant women, and other vulnerable populations. Additionally, it is equally critical that federal regulatory agencies are transparent about the body of scientific literature that is used to establish exposure standards, and must ensure that they are based on biologically-relevant models. This scientific literature must be independent of industry influence and any entity that has a financial interest in continued wireless deployment. It is of utmost importance that HHS and other public health agencies play a central role in evaluating the evidence and identifying where research gaps remain. We must not allow yet another generation of children to be harmed by the effects of wireless radiation. For the sake of our children and their future, we must consider independent science, exercise transparency, and implement the necessary protections to make safer, and more responsible decisions about the wireless environment in which they are growing up. I urge HHS to prioritize rigorous, independent, and transparent research into the health and developmental effects of wireless radiation, particularly for children and other vulnerable populations. As wireless technologies become increasingly embedded in our daily lives, we have a responsibility to ensure that their widespread use is guided by sound science and accompanied by safeguards that fully protect children’s health and development.

The European Commission has adopted a new standard requiring cellphones to be tested for radiation while touching the body — which is how people actually carry and use cellphones: in a pocket or against the skin. We should do the same. Additionally, the cell phones check for the closest cell tower every few seconds when the phone is on which radiates the body for hours a day. I see teenage girls carrying them in their back pocket resulting in colon cancer rates increasing in younger people. Instruct the cell phone companies to only check for the closest cell tower when a call is being made. https://saferemrtechnology.org.nz/2024/11/11/could-mobile-phone-radiation-be-contributing-to-colon-and-rectal-cancer/

As a concerned citizen, 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 support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

These cause harm and do not need to be by kids ball fields, neighborhoods or schools!!

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices. I urge HHS to conduct a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure. Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects. I ask HHS to: •Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. •Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

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 [patient, parent, family member, caregiver, healthcare professional, researcher, advocate, concerned member of the public, or other]. PERSONALIZE YOUR COMMENT HERE: Tell HHS how wireless radiation has affected you, your child, your family, or someone you care about. You may describe the source and duration of the exposure, health effects experienced, when they began, whether reducing exposure made a difference, and how these experiences have affected daily life. If you are an ally, describe why you support people affected by wireless radiation and why you believe HHS should address this issue. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a parent. Wireless radiation acceptable limits have not been updated since the 90s. This is unacceptable give the rapidly changing landscape of wireless technology. Living and working within 300-500 feet of small cell towers has impacted me and my children with noticeable changes in headache frequency and sleep quality. This is not coincidental, and studies MUST be done. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a parent, caregiver and concerned member of the public. In looking around my community there seems to be a significant increase in brain lesions,cancers in the young, qas well as the elderly. I am concerned that exposure to radio frequency waves/radiation in devices and cell towers are to blame. I would like to see proper studies done as to the effects done separate from the entities who have a profit/money interests. We have children and care for a person who depends on us to make health and safety decisions. Please demand that research be done as to the safety of short and long term exposure Thank you kindly Thomas and Angela Halliday